<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (11) TMI 1460 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462116</link>
    <description>Article 226 jurisdiction may rest on the seat of the authority or on part of the cause of action, and the employee&#039;s posting outside the territorial limits does not by itself defeat maintainability. Where the impugned order is issued by an authority within the Bench&#039;s territory, the writ can be entertained even if some facts arise elsewhere. When concurrent jurisdiction exists, forum conveniens is ordinarily assessed from the petitioner&#039;s standpoint as dominus litis, and the State&#039;s preference cannot override a lawful forum choice unless jurisdiction is otherwise lacking. On that basis, orders refusing jurisdiction on forum conveniens were unsustainable and the matters were restored for merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 May 2025 13:08:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=824227" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 1460 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462116</link>
      <description>Article 226 jurisdiction may rest on the seat of the authority or on part of the cause of action, and the employee&#039;s posting outside the territorial limits does not by itself defeat maintainability. Where the impugned order is issued by an authority within the Bench&#039;s territory, the writ can be entertained even if some facts arise elsewhere. When concurrent jurisdiction exists, forum conveniens is ordinarily assessed from the petitioner&#039;s standpoint as dominus litis, and the State&#039;s preference cannot override a lawful forum choice unless jurisdiction is otherwise lacking. On that basis, orders refusing jurisdiction on forum conveniens were unsustainable and the matters were restored for merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462116</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>