Recently, the Calcutta High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging a proprietary tender floated by the Panipat Refinery of Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL), holding that no part of the cause of action arose within its territorial jurisdiction.
The petition, filed by Rubber Regenerating & Processing Co., assailed a tender issued through the Government e-Marketplace (GeM) portal, alleging that the bid was restricted to a single bidder and thereby violated transparency norms. The petitioner argued that the process was an “eyewash” and contrary to Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) guidelines.
Appearing for IOCL, Senior Advocate Vineeta Meharia raised a preliminary objection, contending that the tender related exclusively to Panipat Refinery in Haryana and, therefore, lay outside the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court. She relied on a similar decision of the Madras High Court in M/s Swan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. IOCL & Anr., which had dismissed a like challenge for want of jurisdiction.
On the other hand, Senior Advocate Jishnu Chowdhury, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the grievance was not confined to the Panipat tender but also concerned the petitioner’s right to participate in tendering processes, which was allegedly affected within West Bengal.
Justice Amrita Sinha, however, rejected the plea, observing that the “integral part of the cause of action”, the tender document, was linked to IOCL’s Panipat Refinery. The Court held that merely because the tender was floated online and the petitioner’s participation was allegedly hindered in Kolkata would not confer jurisdiction upon the Calcutta High Court.
While dismissing the petition, the Court clarified that the petitioner would be at liberty to seek remedies before the appropriate forum. It also noted that, since the writ was not entertained, the allegations therein could not be treated as admitted by the respondents.
Case Title: Rubber Regenerating & Processing Co. Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) & Anr.
Case No: WPA 21291 of 2025
Coram: Justice Amrita Sinha
Advocate for Petitioner: Sr. Adv. Jishnu Chowdhury, Advs. Sucheta Mitra, Sanjana Shaw
Advocate for Respondent: Sr. Adv. Vineeta Meharia, Advs. Shounak Mukhopadhyay, Amit Meharia, Paramita Banerjee, Rohan Raj, Tamoghna Chattopadhyay, Sukumar Bhattacharya, S. Sha.
Picture Source :
