Dhar Enterprise And ORS. v. Union Of India And ORS.

M/L 39 12.06.2025 Court No.14 PRADIP

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION WPA 16791 of 2024 Dhar Enterprise & Ors.

Vs.

Union of India & Ors.

Mr. Soumyadeep Das ...for the Petitioners.

Ms. Indrani Chakraborty ...for the Union of India.

Mr. Sanajit Kumar Ghosh Mr. Siddharth Gupta ...for the BSNL.

1. The petitioners are aggrieved as payment has not been made by BSNL in terms of the tender document.

2. On a perusal of the tender document it appears that work in respect of the said tender was executed in Sikkim.

3. Learned advocate representing the respondent authorities submits that this Court does not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition.

4. The respondents also raise an issue of limitation and disputed questions of facts involved in the writ petition.

5. Learned advocate representing the petitioners contends that as it was an e-tender, accordingly, West Bengal will also have jurisdiction to decide the issue.

6. The contention of the petitioners cannot be accepted.

7. The work in question was executed in the State of Sikkim. The tender may have been floated on the electronic mode but the same cannot be said to be the

guiding factor for invoking the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court.

8. In view of the above, the instant writ petition cannot be accepted. The same fails and is hereby dismissed.

9. It will be open for the petitioners to approach the jurisdictional forum for redressal of its grievances, if so advised.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all the requisite formalities.

(Amrita Sinha, J.)