Supreme Court Rules,2013; Order XXVI Rule 6– A plaint is liable to be rejected where it does not disclose a cause of action or where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law.- Order XXVI Rule 6 (a) and (b) are analogous to the provisions in clauses (a) and (d) of Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC -For considering objections under Order VII Rule 11 (a) and (d) of the CPC, what needs to be looked into is only the averments made in the plaint- If the averments made in the plaint are germane then the pleas taken by the defendant in the written statement would be wholly irrelevant at this stage- The averments made in the plaint have to be read as a whole and not in isolation. (Para 22-27)
Constitution of India,1950; Article 32, 131,136– Article 131 of the Constitution is a special provision which deals with the original jurisdiction of this Court in case of a dispute between the Federal Government and the State Governments. It provides for a special jurisdiction to this Court to decide any question on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends. Any dispute either between the Government of India and one or more States; or between the Government of India and any State or States on one side and one or more other States on the other; or between two or more States which involve a question on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends are covered by this provision. A special provision has been made for deciding the question on which the existence or extent of a legal right between the special parties mentioned therein has been provided. Therefore, the words “subject to the provisions of this Constitution” will have to be considered in that context. The jurisdiction under Article 131 of the Constitution would only be subject to any other provision in the Constitution which provides for entertaining a dispute between the parties mentioned therein- Article 32 of the Constitution provides for remedy for enforcement of rights conferred by Part-III of the Constitution whereas Article 136 provides for remedy by way of special leave to appeal before this Court. These are the general remedies available to “any party”. Merely because, in any of the proceedings initiated under Article 32 or Article 136 or even Article 226 of the Constitution, one of the parties is common, the pendency of such proceedings would not come in the way of a specific party mentioned in Article 131 of the Constitution to take recourse to the remedy available therein -A remedy under Article 131 of the Constitution is a special remedy available only to the parties mentioned therein and for the purposes mentioned therein. (Para 75-77)
Summary: In the present suit, the plaintiff is raising the legal issue as to whether after withdrawal of the consent under Section 6 of the DSPE Act, the CBI via the defendant – Union of India can continue to register and investigate cases in its area in violation of the provisions of Section 6 of the DSPE Act. The same has been sought to be attacked by the defendant – Union of India by raising various contentions challenging the maintainability of the suit. In our considered opinion, the contentions raised by the defendant, do not merit acceptance and for the reasons given hereinbefore, are rejected. The preliminary objection is, therefore, rejected.