Allowed

M/S Robertsganj Gas Agency v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited and 2 Others

Allahabad HC9 Jul 2024WRIC/18453/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the appellate order of the General Manager (LPG) dismissing the petitioner's appeal against a penalty imposed under MDG 2022. The court held that the appellate authority failed to consider the petitioner's contentions and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication with an opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned appellate order set aside; matter remitted to the appellate authority to decide the appeal afresh within six weeks after affording an opportunity of hearing.

M/S Robertsganj Gas Agency vs Indian Oil… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:130869

¶2

Court No. - 33

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18453 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- M/S Robertsganj Gas Agency Respondent :- Indian Oil Corporation Limited And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nikhil Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- Archana Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

¶6

1.Heard Counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Archana Singh, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶7

2.The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:

¶8

"(i) to issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Order No. UPSO-1 /Appeal / Robertsganj/ 1 dated 9.04.2024 passed by the General Manager (LPG), UPSO-1, respondent no.1, enclosed as Annexure no-1 to the present petition,

¶9

(ii) to issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Order no AIDO/Robertsganj/ dated 26 12 2023 passed by the Divisional LPG Sales Head, Allahabad Divisional Office, respondent no.3, enclosed as Annexure no-2 to the present petition.

¶10

(iii) to issue a suitable writ order or direction in the nature of prohibition, restraining or prohibiting the respondents, their officers, servants and agents in proceeding in any manner pursuant to the Order No. UPSO-1/Appeal / Robertsganj i)

¶11

(iv) to issue a suitable writ order or direction in the nature of prohibition, restraining or prohibiting the respondents, their officers, servants and agents in proceeding in any manner

¶12

pursuant to the Order no AIDO/Robertsganj/ dated 26. 12. 2023 passed by the Divisional LPG Sales Head, Allahabad Divisional Office, respondent no 3, enclosed as Annexure no-2 to the present petition.

¶13

v) to issue a suitable writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondents to refund the amount of Rs 206115/- along with interest, which was debited from the account of the petitioner towards MDG penalty pursuant to the Order no AIDO/Robertsganj/ dated 26.12.2023 passed by the Divisional LPG Sales Head, Allahabad Divisional Office, respondent no 3, enclosed as Annexure no-2 to the present petition

¶14

(v) to issue any other suitable order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case

¶15

v) to award costs throughout to the petitioner."

¶16

This Court on 24.07.2024 has passed the following order:

¶17

"1. Heard Sri Nikhil Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Archana Singh, learned standing counsel for all the respondents.

¶18

2. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed in arbitrary manner without considering the case of the petitioner as set up in the appeal.

¶19

3. Matter requires consideration.

¶20

4. Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for the respondents shall file counter affidavits within 2 weeks.

¶21

5. Put up this matter as fresh on 13.8.2024".

¶22

In compliance of the order dated 24.07.2024 counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that imposition of penalty upon the petitioner under clause 2.2.3 of the Marketing Discipline Guideline is contrary to the material & evidence on record. He further submitted that appeal filed by petitioner has been decided in arbitrary manner without considering the points raised in appeal. He submitted that there is no consideration of petitioner's case while passing the impugned appellate order. He further submitted that appellate remedy is effective remedy as such the appeal is to be decided after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the parties as well as considering the grounds set up in the appeal before the appellate authority.

¶24

On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submitted that appeal has been decided rightly by the appellate authority as such no interference is required in the matter. She further submitted that petitioner has no case on merit as such even in absence of detailed reason in support of appellate order will not make any difference.

¶25

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶26

There is no dispute about the facts that under the impugned appellate order dated 09.04.2024 appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed against the order dated 26.12.2023 by which penalty has been imposed upon the petitioner under LPG Marketing Discipline Guidelines 2022.

¶27

In order to appreciate the controversy, the perusal of the impugned appellate order dated 09.04.2024 will be necessary which is as under:

¶28

"To

¶29

M/s Robertsganj Gas Agency, Robertgan) District: Sonbhadra (UP)

¶30

SUB: DISPOSAL OF YOUR APPEAL AGAINST ACTION UNDER MDG 2022

¶31

Dear Sir,

¶32

Please refer to your letter ref: Nil dated nil by which your have filed an appeal before this office against action taken by Allahabad IDO against MDG vide ref: AIDO/Robertsganj Gas Speaking order dated26.12.2023 Your appeal and the details provided by you vide dated Nil have been carefully examined with following observation:

¶33

Inventory verification was carried out in the early morning before the start of Godown operation in presence of You and endorsed by you without any objection and no internet connectivity issue was informed to the inspecting team nor it is recorded.

¶34

Also your explanation regarding other discrepancies like showroom mechanic/delivery men not in uniform, testing due cyls, 100 empty cylinder of OMC were found in godown and non compliance of pre delivery check are physical observation of the inspecting officers against which your reply is not acceptable

¶35

Hence in view of the above, justification given by you in your reply to waive off MDG penalty is not justified and hence appeal is rejected.

¶36

This order is passed as per the provisions of appeal in the MDG2022 guideline under clause 3.11 and is without any prejudice.

¶37

Thanking you,

¶38

Yours faithfully, For Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (KM Thakur) General Manager (LPG) UPSO"

¶39

10.The perusal of appellate order demonstrate that there is no proper consideration of the case of the petitioner.

¶40

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, impugned appellate order dated 09.04.2024 passed by respondent No.1 is liable to be set aside and the same is hereby set aside. The writ petition is allowed in part and matter is remitted back before the respondent Nos.1/ appellate authority who shall register the petitioner's appeal and decide the same afresh after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as considering the points raised in appeal filed by the petitioner in proper manner expeditiously preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶41

Order Date :- 13.8.2024 PS*

¶42

Digitally signed by :- PRITI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

M/S Robertsganj Gas Agency v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Robertsganj Gas Agency v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dinesh Nishad vs State of Up and 19 Others

Rajesh Kumar vs State of Up and 2 Others

Maharaj Singh vs State of Up and 4 Others

Janardan Singh vs State of Up and 4 Others

Nagar Nigam Meerut vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Lalita vs State of U.P. and 5 Others