Disposed

Rama Pareek v. Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd. etc.

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Mar 2012CWP/9351/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The bench disposed of writ petitions regarding termination of a dealership. Relying on an order by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas restoring sales and supplies, the court held that a pending show-cause notice challenging the petitioner's eligibility became inoperative and the petitions were disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Hold that the show cause notice becomes inoperative in the facts and circumstances; dispose of the writ petitions.

Rama Pareek Vs Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CWP No.9351 of 2010 (O & M)

¶2

::1::

¶3

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.9351 of 2010 (O & M) Date of Decision: March 13, 2012

Rama Pareek

....Petitioner

Versus

M/s Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited and others

¶9

.... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL

¶11

Present: Ms. Promila Nain, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents.

¶13

¶14

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

¶15

This order shall dispose of four writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos. 6412, 6574, 9351 and 9378 of 2010 as identical issues are involved therein. However, for brevity, the facts are being extracted from CWP No.9351 of 2010.

¶16

The petitioner's retail outlet was established on 01.07.2005 and an order of termination in respect of the same was passed by the respondent-Corporation on the ground that it violated multiple dealership norms, according to which, only one petrol pump could be allotted within a family. The order terminating the dealership dated 22.03.2010 was challenged by the petitioner before this Court

¶17

::2::

¶18

CWP No.9351 of 2010 (O & M)

¶19

by filing CWP No.6412 of 2010. The operation of order dated 22.03.2010 was stayed by this Court whereby the dealership agreement was terminated as the said order was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner vide order dated 30.04.2010. The respondent-Corporation assailed the order dated 30.04.2010 by way of LPA No.599 of 2010, wherein the Hon'ble Bench after hearing the learned counsel for the respondentCorporation allowed the writ petition vide order dated 07.05.2010. However, liberty was granted to the respondent-Corporation to issue fresh show cause notice to the petitioner after complying with the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, vide Annexure P-4, a show cause notice was issued on 11.05.2010, which is the bone of contention in the present writ petition.

¶20

It is not essential to deal with the other controversy raised in this petition, as during the pendency of the present writ petition, vide order dated 09.02.2011 passed by Union of India, which has been addressed to the respondent-Corporation, the sales and supplies have been restored to the petitioner and the said order reads thus:-

¶21

“ The matter relating to M/s Shree Balaji Power Point, G.T. Road, Dhandari Kalan, Ludhiana, a Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) Retail Outlet, has been examined in this Ministry. 2. BPCL is directed to resume sales and supplies to the subject Retail Outlet with immediate effect under intimation to this Ministry.”

¶22

The above-mentioned order produced by learned

¶23

CWP No.9351 of 2010 (O & M)

¶24

::3::

¶25

counsel for the respondents today in Court, is taken on record as Mark 'A'.

¶26

On the basis of the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once the sales and supplies have been restored to the petitioner by the Ministry, the show cause notice (Annexure P-4) which was with regard to the eligibility of the petitioner to receive the supplies, loses its significance. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that a departmental enquiry held by the officers of the respondent-Corporation has also culminated in favour of the petitioner and the issue with regard to the eligibility of the petitioner has been adjudicated in favour of the petitioner.

¶27

Learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation was unable to dispute the said fact. On the last date of hearing, learned counsel for the respondents had sought time to seek instructions from the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India as to whether something still survives in the show cause notice (Annexure P-4). Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents informs that he has not received any instructions from the respondents in spite of having sent a communication to them.

¶28

In view of the facts noticed above, more particularly that the Ministry itself has ordered the restoration of the sales and supplies to the petitioner, it is, thus, implied that the eligibility of the petitioner is not doubted by the respondents or the Ministry. In such a situation, the show cause notice (Annexure P-4) challenging the eligibility of the petitioner does not carry any substance.

¶29

CWP No.9351 of 2010 (O & M) ::4::

¶30

Accordingly, the present writ petitions are disposed of by holding that the show cause notice (Annexure P-4) becomes inoperative in the above facts and circumstances.

¶31

In view of order dated 07.05.2010 passed in LPA No.599 of 2010, no further orders are called for in CWP Nos.6410 and 6574 of 2010.

¶32

A copy of this order be placed on the files of the

¶33

connected cases.

¶34

March 13, 2012 sukhpreet

¶35

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE

Rama Pareek v. Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd. etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rama Pareek v. Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd. etc.

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

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar Bathla Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Dashmesh Trailor Transport Nabha Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Ashok Kumar Jain Vs Commissioner Revenue Chd. and Ors.

M/S Daljit Singh & Bros. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Puran Singh & Ors. Vs Joginder Singh

M/S Punjab Agriculture Industries Vs State of Punjab and Others