Supreme Court of India
BHANDARI & DIPAK MISRA
Allied Motors Ltd.
Versus
Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd.
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11200 OF 2011 [Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.31535 of 2009]
Decided on: 16-12-2011
(a) Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel (Regulation of Supply and Distribution and prevention of Malpractices) Order, 1999 – Clause 4 – Petroleum dealership – Terminable only on second instance of adulteration in motor spirits – Appellant’s dealership terminated for only first instance of adulteration – Violative of clause 4 – Moreover procedures for taking samples not followed. (Para 19)
(2003) 2 SCC 107; 104 (2003) DLT 601; (1979) 3 SCC 489; AIR 1936 PC 253; (1991) 1 SCC 212; (2009) 1 SCC 150; (1983) 3 SCC 379 – Referred
(b) Petroleum Dealership – Samples taken in utter violation of rules and procedures – Dealership terminated on the very next day of taking samples – No notice given – No opportunity of hearing afforded – Dealership cancelled on first allegation of adulteration – Termination order set aside. (Para 58, 59, 60)
Facts of the case:
This case relates to termination of petroleum dealership.
the appellant, it had been operating the petrol pump for the last 30 years and during this period it was given 10 awards from time to time declaring its dealership as the best petrol pump in the entire State of NCT of Delhi. On a number of occasions, samples of the appellant were tested by the respondent-Corporation and on each occasion its samples were found to be as per the specifications.
The licence of the appellant was terminated for alleged adulteration of motor spirit. The appellant alleged that in taking the samples prescribed procedures were not followed. Moreover, this was appellant’s first alleged case of adulteration whereas termination can be ordered only on repeated incidents of adulteration.
Finding of the Court:
Termination of appellant’s dealership is bad.
Result: Appeal allowed with cost.
Judgment :-
DalveerBhandari, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 11th August, 2009 delivered in Letters Patent Appeal No.296 of 2009 by the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi upholding the judgment dated 6th May, 2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (Civil) No.2927 of 2005.
3. Themain issue which arises for adjudication in this appeal pertains to the termination of the dealership of the appellant in an illegal and arbitrary manner.
4. According to the appellant, it had been operating the petrol pump for the last 30 years and during this period it was given 10 awards from time to time declaring its dealership as the best petrol pump in the entire State of NCT of Delhi. On a number of occasions, samples of the appellant were tested by the respondent-Corporation and on each occasion its samples were found to be as per the specifications.
5. According to the appellant, it had maintained highest standards and norms of an excellent petrol pump, yet, the respondent-Corporation, in a clandestine manner, terminated its dealership in the most arbitrary manner and in total violation of the principles of natural justice.
6. It was further urged by the appellant that its dealership was terminated without even issuing any show cause notice and/or giving an opportunity of hearing to it. The termination of dealership was contrary to the mandatory procedural provisions of law. According to the appellant, the said termination was mala fide, arbitrary and illegal.
7. It may be pertinent to mention that in the morning of 15th May, 2000, an unauthorized police officer accompanied by the officials of the respondent conducted a raid at the appellant's petrol pump. According to the appellant, the raid was illegal as an unauthorized police officer could not conduct a search and seize the samples of the appellant.
8. The appellant urged that the samples taken in this raid were in complete violation of the mandatory procedural provisions of law as provided under the Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel (Regulation of Supply and Distribution and prevention of Malpractices) Order, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as "Order"). The appellant while reproducing the relevant provisions of law has submitted as under:-
(a) Clause 4 of the said Order provides for power of search and seizure. Sub-Clause (A) of the section authorizes any police officer not below the rank of the Deputy Superintendent of Police (for short, DSP) duly authorized or any Officer of the concerned Oil Company not below the rank of Sales Officer to take samples of the products and/or seize any of the stocks of the product which the officer has reason to believe has been or is being or is about to be used in contravention of the said Order.
9. In the present case, however, the samples were collected in complete violation of the aforesaid provisions. The Police official who had conducted the raid and collected the samples was admittedly below the rank of DSP. This is also recorded in the Metropolitan Magistrate's order dated 27.5.2002 passed in FIR No.193 of 2000 wherein it is stated as under:
"In the present case the search and seizure was conducted by an unauthorized police officer of the rank of Inspector which is totally contrary to the mandatory provisions of the said Clause 4."
(b) Sub-Clause (B) of Clause 4 of the said Order provides that while exercising the power of seizure under Clause 4 (A) (iv) the authorised officer shall record in writing the reasons for doing so, a copy of the which shall be given to the dealer.
10. According to the appellant, in the present case, no such reasons in writing were provided.
(c) Clause 5(2) of the said Order lays down the procedure for sampling of product which provides that "the Officer authorised in Cl. 4 shall take, sign and seal six samples of 1 litre each of the Motor Spirit or 2 of 1 lit. each of the High Speed Diesel, 2 samples of the Motor Spirit (or one of High Speed Diese
Harbanslal Sahnia v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India
Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi v. State of U.P.
Karnataka State Forest Industries Corporation v. Indian Rocks
Gujarat State Financial Corporation v. M/s. Lotus Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.