Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
N.V. RAMANA, AMITAVA ROY, JJ.
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Shashi Prabha Shukla & Anr. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 5565 of 2009
Decided On : 15-12-2017
(b) Government contract – Petroleum dealership – Dealership of respondent vitiated by favouritism – Cancelled – Corporation not acting in terms of High Court judgment – Issuing faulty advertisement – High Court directing award of fresh dealership to respondent converting the existing dealership under Corporation’s policy dated 12.02.2004 – Not sustainable – Dealership having been terminated and the order attaining finality, notwithstanding challenge to fresh advertisement, respondent’s dealership could not be construed to be subsisting – Converting existing dealership into new one not sustainable – Doing so would amount to allowing the respondent to enjoy the premium of the illegality and arbitrariness in granting her the earlier dealership. (Para 34)
(2011) 5 SCC 29; (1979) 3 SCC 489; Special Reference No.1 of 1012; (2012) 3 SCC 2 – Relied upon
[1968] AC 997 – Referred
Facts of the case:
The respondent herein, claiming to be an unemployed graduate but actively involved in activities pertaining to rural development and welfare of women, but without any regular source of livelihood, applied to the then Minister of Petroleum, Government of India, New Delhi for being sanctioned a petrol pump under his Special Discretionary Quota on the National Highway, Phutahia Chauraha, Tehsil and District Basti, U.P.
Accordingly, the Indian Oil Corporation issued a Letter Of Intent (LOI) on 04.10.1995 for a retail outlet dealership in motor spirit and high speed diesel oil on the National Highway at Phutahia Chauraha, District Basti under “A” category. Thereafter a lease deed was executed on 16.09.1996 between the respondent and the appellant/Corporation for a period of 30 years at a monthly rent of Rs.1650/- payable to the former by the latter w.e.f. 01.03.1996 and was made renewable at the option of the parties.
This grant of dealership to the respondent came to be impeached along with other grants in a public interest litigation before the High Court of Delhi by the Center for Public Interest Litigation, in all questioning allotment of 179 retail outlets (petrol pumps), 155 LPG distributorship and 45 SKO/LDO dealerships from January 1993 till 1996 by the Departmental Minister under his discretionary quota.
It was held that the materials on record reflected unexplained surge of favourtism in the matter of distribution of the aforementioned public contracts/distributorships/ dealerships.
The judgment and order dated 29.08.1997 of the Delhi High Court attained finality and eventually the retail outlet was closed and the facilities were taken over by the Corporation w.e.f 01.12.1997.
The Corporation thereafter issued an advertisement dated 05.10.1998 to auction the outlet hitherto allotted to the respondent.
The Corporation was required to undertake this conscious exercise, it being clear that the location for the re-auction has to be essentially different from, though in proximity of the existing location.
The respondent launched her assailment against the advertisement dated 05.10.1998 and the corrigendum dated 13.10.1998, this time before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad pleading the same to be violative of the directions contained in the judgment and order dated 29.08.1997 and also in violation of her fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
Eventually, by the impugned judgment and order, the High Court directed the Corporation, in view of its new policy dated 12.02.2004, to award fresh dealership to the respondent thereunder and further restrained it from interfering with her possession of the petrol pump premises in question.
The High Court thus directed the Corporation to award fresh dealership by converting the earlier dealership thereunder within one month and also further restrained it from interfering with the respondent's possession over the petrol pump premises in question.
Finding of the Court:
Impugned judgment is not sustainable.
Result: Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Amitava Roy, J.
1. The Indian Oil Corporation Limited (hereafter to be referred to as the “IOC/Corporation”) and its functionaries, in this appeal seek to overturn the judgment and order dated 04.10.2004 rendered by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc. Petition No. 34886 of 1998, thereby directing the Corporation to convert the dealership of a petrol pump initially allotted in favour of the respondent No.1 (hereafter to be referred to as the “respondent”) under the discretionary quota of the Departmental Minister concerned to one under its (appellant) circular No.67-2/2K4 dated 12.02.2004 and restraining it as well from interfering with the possession of the respondent of the installation premises. As the sequence of events would unfold, the attendant facts do project a distressing state of affairs in the matter of distribution of State largesse, seemingly motivated by irrelevant considerations, deliberate defaults and casual disregard to binding judicial adjudications of a Constitutional Court.
2. We have heard Mr. Annam D.N. Rao, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Tripurari Ray, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1. Though served, but none has filed vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No. 2.
3. First the skeletal facts, to facilitate the desired grip of the issues to be addressed. The respondent herein, claiming to be an unemployed graduate but actively involved in activities pertaining to rural development and welfare of women, but without any regular source of livelihood, applied to the then Minister of Petroleum, Government of India, New Delhi for being sanctioned a petrol pump under his Special Discretionary Quota on the National Highway, Phutahia Chauraha, Tehsil and District Basti, U.P. The application was considered for allotment of a retail outlet dealership on compassionate ground and was forwarded for necessary follow-up action to the Direction (Marketing), Indian Oil Corporation, Bombay on 08.08.1985. In deference to the said communication, the Corporation issued a Letter Of Intent (LOI) on 04.10.1995 for a retail outlet dealership in motor spirit and high speed diesel oil on the National Highway at Phutahia Chauraha, District Basti under “A” category. Thereafter a lease deed was executed on 16.09.1996 between the respondent and the appellant/Corporation for a period of 30 years at a monthly rent of Rs.1650/- payable to the former by the latter w.e.f. 01.03.1996 and was made renewable at the option of the parties. It was inter alia agreed that the appellant/Corporation would develop the retail outlet and provide the same to the respondent with certain facilities, such as, a suitable plot of land duly developed as an outlet with office building, storage, tank and pump, air facility etc.
4. The pleaded stand of the respondent in this regard however is that though the dealership was declared to be under “A” category, for which as per the norms, the appellant/Corporation was required to provide the infrastructure including land, in her case on its persuasion and insistences, she had to purchase the necessary land and make further investments to make it fit for the installation by expending more than Rs.14 lakhs, against which she was to receive a nominal monthly lease rent of Rs.1650/-. She also expressed her grievances with regard to the allotments of the supplies made to her from time to time, resulting in heavy financial loss to her in business.
5. Be that as it may, this grant of dealership to the respondent came to be impeached along with other grants in a public interest litigation being Writ Petition(C) No.4003 of 1995 before the High Court of Delhi by the Center for Public Interest Litigation, in all questioning allotment of 179 retail outlets (petrol pumps), 155 LPG distributorship and 45 SKO/LDO dealerships from January 1993 till 1996 by the Departmental Minister under his discretionary quota and upon complete adjudication of the issues with the participation of the parti
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
