Two-judge bench disposed of this writ petition filed by a lubricant dealer seeking a mandate not to terminate his dealership. The court accepted the respondents' statement at the bar regarding their policy of following natural justice and recorded a statement accordingly before closing the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 20.12.2019
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
Writ Petition No.24579 of 2019
and W.M.P.Nos.24253 and 24254 of 2019
S.Suriya .. Petitioner /versus/
1.Territory Manager(Lubes) Reseller,
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, No.1, Ranganthan Gardens, 11th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040.
2.Bazaar Channel Manager-Lubes(South), Lubricants Department, Bharat Petroleum Corp.Ltd., No.1, Ranganathan Gardens, Opp.11th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040. .. Respondents
prayer:-
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents not to cancel the petitioner dealership (RLD) with them arbitrarily.
(Prayer amended as per Order dated 05/12/2019 made in W.M.P.No.30926/2019 in W.P.No.24579/2019 by CVKJ)
For Petitioner :Mr.Kanimozhimathi
The petitioner had filed the present writ petition in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents not to cancel the dealership of the petitioner, arbitrarily.
1/3
Vaniampadi Taluk and Tiruppattur Taluk. He was called for an interview on 13.07.2017 and got selected and a Letter of Intent dated 04.09.2017 was issued by the respondents, wherein it is stated that the respondents are continuing to supply the lubricants to the petitioner. The petitioner originally apprehended that the dealership would be cancelled in view of the fact that an advertisement had been placed calling for fresh dealership. However, pending the writ petition, the prayer had been amended seeking a direction that the petitioner's dealership should not be terminated. A statement is made across the bar by Mr.M.Vijayan, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2, that the policy of the respondents is that they never terminate any dealership arbitrarily. The respondents have always been following letter and spirit of law and also following the principles of natural justice by issuing show cause notice to any dealer. Similarly, the respondents have also a right of liberty to issue show cause notice, if they want to terminate the dealership. If a show cause notice is issued, the petitioner must certainly be given an opportunity to reply to the same. In this case, such a situation does not arise as on date.
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
2/3
ari To:
1.Territory Manager(Lubes) Reseller,
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited,
No.1, Ranganthan Gardens, 11th Main Road,
Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040.
2.Bazaar Channel Manager-Lubes(South),
Lubricants Department, Bharat Petroleum Corp.Ltd.,
No.1, Ranganathan Gardens, Opp.11th Main Road,
Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040.
+1cc to M/s King and Partridge, Advocate sr.106669
W.P.No.24579 of 2019
and
W.M.P.Nos.24253 and 24254 of 2019
pvs(co)
nr 03/02/2020
3/3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should direct the respondents not to cancel the petitioner's dealership arbitrarily without following due process.
S. Suriya
Territory Manager(Lubes) Reseller, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited
Bazaar Channel Manager-Lubes(South), Bharat Petroleum Corp.Ltd.
C.V. Karthikeyan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
