HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR‘ No. s84 af 2010 W.P§C]! Marketing Private ETITIONER M/s. Limited Aasma (Enginsers, Consultant and General Order Suppliers), in front of Shepherded School, Mungeli Road, Bilaspur G) — Through its Proprietor Shri Ratnesh Jaiswal, s/o Late aged Shri about Ramos 41 years, r/o Bilaspur h Kumar jaiswal, (CG), Vs. 1 The the State Secretary, of Madhya Urban Pradesh Administration through and Mantralay Development at Vallabh Bhawan,Bhopa1 Department, Administration Madhya Pradesh, and Bhopal Development, (MP). 3. The Administration Superintending a Engineer, Development, Urban Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal (M.P}. (My). 2 The Commissioner, Urban irector, Urban Development, 4. The Divisional Deputy D Administration Rewa Division, Rewa an (MP). The Chief Munie Palika Parishad, Shahdol (MP). ipal Ofiieer, Nagar Dhanpuri, District WRIT PETIT F INDIA Appearance: a, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Ravi Ranjan Sinh Q,” ORDER _o’__,/ (10.02.2010) I SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J, Heard on admission. Private Limited, Bilaspur, / s. Aasma Marketing has filed this petition for issu the se the payments of to respondent n Petitioner M writ/ direction ance of an appropriate 0.5 to forthwith relea I 2 w. P. (C) No. 584/2010 petitioner’s outstanding bills that is final bill amounting to Rs.11,59,676/~ as also' earnest money deposit of Rs.40,000/—. The petitioner has also claimed interest @ 18% per annum. Admittedly, the work for which the payment is being claimed, was a work for installation of a Filter Plant in Dhanpuri, Distt. Sahdol (M.P)’ A copy of the work order dated 16.6.2004 issued by Chief Municipal Officer, Dhanpuri, has been filed as Annexure P—l. After perusal of the pleadings made by the petitioner in the writ petition, it does not appear that any part of cause of action arose in the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court of Chhattisgarh. Article 226 of the Constitution of India provides that every High Court shall have powers, throughout the territories in relation a to which . it . exerc1ses . Jurisdiction, . . . . to issue . to any ’ person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, within those territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certioran', or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III‘ and for any other purpose. Since no part of cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, this writ petition for the said reliefs would not lie before this Court. Accordinglyu, W,P.(C ). No.584/2010 is dismissed, for want of J 'urisdiction. / sm- : SUNIL KUMARSINHA ‘ “Eat/i“