SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(SC) 300

SANJAY KUMAR, K. VINOD CHANDRAN
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Deepak Sharma – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Raghavendra P. Shankar, A.S.G. Mrs. Priya Puri, AOR Ms. Pallavi Mishra, Adv. Mr. Neelabh Bisht, Adv. Mr. Sachin Dubey, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Adv. Mr. Sharad Kumar Puri, Adv. Ms. Riya Dogra, Adv. Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Abhay Singh, AOR Mr. Nishant Das, Adv. Mrs. Ankita Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Nimish Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Jishnu Adhikari, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Kausar Raza Faridi, AOR Mr. Siddhartha Iyer, Adv. Ms. Ila Shikhar Sheel, AOR Mr. Aman Gupta, Adv. Ms. Srishti Ghoshal, Adv. Ms. Shristi Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Raghavendra P. Shankar, A.S.G. Mrs. Priya Puri, AOR Ms. Pallavi Mishra, Adv. Mr. Neelabh Bisht, Adv. Mr. Sachin Dubey, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Adv. Mr. Sharad Kumar Puri, Adv. Ms. Riya Dogra, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, AOR Ms. Tulika Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Saurabh Mishra, AOR

Table of Content
1. guidelines on petrol pump siting criteria (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. ngt's procedural issues and reports (Para 4 , 5 , 15 , 16)
3. arguments from appellants and respondents (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. adjudicatory authority of ngt emphasized (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
5. failure of ngt to follow principles of natural justice (Para 14 , 17 , 18 , 19)
6. court's final ruling and directions (Para 20 , 21)

JUDGMENT

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

1. This is a classic case of how a busy body stalled the commencement of a petrol pump, thus frustrating the establishment of a commercial enterprise and the setting up of a public utility outlet for about six years. The 1st respondent filed an application before the National Green Tribunal (for short, the NGT), allegedly aggrieved with the illegal manner in which a petrol pump was being set up, adjacent to a gas agency and a play school. The specific allegation was that the proposed site offended the guidelines issued by the Central Pollution Control Board (for short, the CPCB), brought out at the instance of the NGT.

2. The violation was claimed to be of the siting criteria for retail outlets specified in the guidelines dated 07.01.2020 issued by the CPC

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top