https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311332 The Delhi HC held that it had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petitions challenging the punitive charges and paragraph 1744 of the Indian Railways Commercial Manual under Article 226(1) of the Constitution. The court reasoned that the Railway Board, which issued the contested manual, is based in Delhi, thereby linking the case to the court's jurisdiction. The petitions were deemed maintainable, as the challenge to the punitive demands was directly connected to the validity of the manual. The court dismissed the respondents' jurisdictional objections, affirming the applicability of Article 226(2) for jurisdiction based on cause of action. en-us Mon, 02 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Dec 2023 16:13:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311332 The Delhi HC held that it had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petitions challenging the punitive charges and paragraph 1744 of the Indian Railways Commercial Manual under Article 226(1) of the Constitution. The court reasoned that the Railway Board, which issued the contested manual, is based in Delhi, thereby linking the case to the court's jurisdiction. The petitions were deemed maintainable, as the challenge to the punitive demands was directly connected to the validity of the manual. The court dismissed the respondents' jurisdictional objections, affirming the applicability of Article 226(2) for jurisdiction based on cause of action. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 02 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311332