M/s Nirala Filling Station v. M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Patna HC20 Jan 2025CWJC/21215/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

IOCL retail outlet dealership termination challenged by writ; Patna High Court directs parties to arbitration Clause 67 of Memorandum of Agreement; writ petition disposed with liberty to invoke arbitration clause; merits expressly left unaddressed; condonation of delay to consider time spent in writ proceedings; certiorari and mandamus reliefs; decided 20-01-2025 by Smt. Justice G. Anupama Chakravarthy; no statutory provisions or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to invoke the arbitration clause for redressal of grievances; no adjudication on merits and no reinstatement ordered. ¶¶30

M/s Nirala Filling Station Vs M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Ors. — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to invoke the arbitration clause for redressal of grievances; no adjudication on merits and no reinstatement ordered.

¶¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's grievances regarding termination of its dealership should be redressed through arbitration under Clause 67 of the Memorandum of Agreement rather than through the Court's extraordinary writ jurisdiction.

¶¶29

Court's answer

A remedy by way of arbitration is available to the petitioner under Clause 67 of the Memorandum of Agreement for the relief sought in the writ petition.

¶¶29

Ratio / Principle

The Court is not inclined to interfere by exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction in view of the availability of the arbitration remedy.

¶¶30

Key takeaways

The Court expresses no opinion on the merits of the termination dispute.obiter¶¶30
If the petitioner files such an arbitration application, the concerned authority shall take the present proceeding into consideration while deciding any issue relating to condonation of delay, if applicable.ratio¶¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Patna (Smt. G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J.), CWJC No. 21215 of 2013, oral order dated 20-01-2025. Petitioner M/s Nirala Filling Station had sought certiorari to quash the termination of its Indian Oil Corporation dealership by order dated 26.04.2011 (Annexure-8) issued by respondent no. 5 vide memo no. BSO/RET/HFS, and the confirmation of that termination by order dated 11.09.2013 (Annexure-13) issued by respondent no. 2, together with mandamus for reinstatement of the dealership and resumption of sales and supply. Observing that Clause 67 of the Memorandum of Agreement (Annexure-1) affords the petitioner a remedy by way of arbitration for the relief sought, the Court declined to interfere through its extraordinary writ jurisdiction, disposed of the writ petition with liberty to invoke the arbitration clause, and expressly stated that it was expressing no opinion on the merits. The Court further clarified that, if an arbitration application is filed, the concerned authority shall take the present proceeding into account while deciding any question of condonation of delay, if applicable. Interlocutory application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21215 of 2013

¶2

======================================================

¶3

M/s Nirala Filling Station S/O Sri Bishundev Paswan Resident Of Village - Yusufpur, Ward No.26, P.O. and P.S. Hajipur, District - Vaishali Bihar

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Ors At Indian Oil Bhawan, G - 9, Ali Yavar Jung Marg, Bandra East , Mumbai - 400051

¶7

Director R and D , Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Corporate Office 3079/3, Sadiq Nagar, J.B. Tito Marg, New Delhi - 110049

¶8

Director Hr, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Corporate Office 3079/3, Sadiq Nagar, J.B. Tito Marg, New Delhi - 110049

¶9

Executive Director, Indian Oil Bhawan G - 9, Ali Yavar Jung Marg, Bandra East , Mumbai - 400051

¶10

The General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Bihar State Office 5th Floor, Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Bhawan, Dak Bunglow Chowk, Patna - 800001

¶11

Dy. General Manager Retail Sales , Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. 5th Floor, Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Bhawan, Dak Bunglow Chowk, Patna - 800001

¶12

Senior Divisional Retail Sales Manager Sdrsm , Indian Oil Corporation, Ltd., Patna Divisional Off 3rd Floor, Maurya Complex, Patna - 800001

¶13

Manager Rs , Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Patna Divisional Office 3rd Floor, Maurya Complex, Patna - 800001

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sanat Kumar Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶16

24 20-01-2025

¶17

Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner

¶18

as well as the respondents.

¶19

The petitioner has filed the Writ petition for

¶20

the following reliefs:-

¶21

“i. For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/ direction

¶22

Patna High Court CWJC No.21215 of 2013(24) dt.20-01-2025 2/4

¶23

preferably in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 26.04.2011 (Annexure- 8) issued vide memo no. BSO/RET/HFS by respondent no. 5 whereby and whereunder, the dealership of the petitioner has been terminated.

¶24

ii. For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/ direction preferably in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 11.09.2013 (Annexure-13) issued by respondent no. 2 whereby and whereunder, he has upheld the order of termination dated 26.04.2011 passed by the respondent no. 5 in regard to the dealership of the petitioner as contained in Annexure- 8.

¶25

iii. For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to reinstate/restore the dealership of the petitioner and subsequent thereof resume the sales from and supply to retail outlet.

¶26

iv. For any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is found to be entitled in the facts and circumstances of

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.21215 of 2013(24) dt.20-01-2025 3/4

¶28

the case.

¶29

At the very outset, it is relevant to mention that on perusal of Memorandum of Agreement (Annexure1) entered into between the petitioner and the respondents, it appears from a bare reading of Clause 67 that a remedy by way of arbitration is available to the petitioner for the relief sought for in the Writ petition.

¶30

In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter of exercise its extraordinary Writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to invoke the arbitration clause for the redressal of his grievances. It is made clear that this Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter.

¶31

Furthermore, it is clarified, in case if such an application is filed, the concerned authority shall take into consideration the present proceeding pursued by the petitioner while deciding any issue relating to the

¶32

Patna High Court CWJC No.21215 of 2013(24) dt.20-01-2025 4/4

¶33

(limitation) condonation of delay, if applicable.

¶34