IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda, J.
Kasturi Petroleums - Petitioner
Versus
The Union Of India and Others - Respondents
Writ Petition No: 20171/2024
Decided On : 12-09-2024
Writ - Termination of Dealership - Article 226 - The court discussed the principles of natural justice and the Marketing Discipline Guidelines, emphasizing the need for fair conduct and the right to appeal before possession is handed over.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the termination of their retail outlet dealership after a lengthy inspection process, claiming the decision was arbitrary and violated their rights under the Constitution.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the termination order lacked fair conduct and violated the petitioner's right to appeal, thus granting interim relief to continue operations until the appeal is resolved.
Issues: Whether the termination of the dealership was arbitrary and whether the petitioner was denied the right to a fair hearing and appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that public authorities must act fairly and reasonably, and that the petitioner should not be dispossessed before the appeal period expires.
Result: The writ petition is disposed of with directions to allow the petitioner to continue operations until the appeal is decided.
ORDER:
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda, J.
The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
2. The short grievance of the petitioner herein is that the 2nd respondent herein has terminated the petitioner’s retail outlet dealership vide order dated 06.09.2024 after lapse of four years from the date of inspection dated 04.09.2020 though the petitioner submitted reply on 02.11.2022 to the show cause notice dated 14.10.2022 issued to him. Enquiry also conducted in the year 2022 itself. To the surprise of the petitioner this impugned termination proceedings dated 06.09.2024 were served on 10.09.2024, when W.P.No.19715 of 2024 came up for hearing at the time of admission.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein is appointed as retail outlet dealer at Etukuru Road, Nallacheruvu, Guntur District by the respondent corporation on 31.01.2005. Since then, the petitioner has been operating retail outlet business without any adverse remarks. While things stood thus, the Inspection Team from Divisional Office along with Legal Metrology Department and OEM vendors conducted inspection on 04.09.2020 and some technical defects in respect of E01 & E11 logs have been observed. All K factors have found to be matching with calibration logs. On further observation of the DU, all the seals have been found intact but it was observed that there is difference between seals of control card and that of the pulsars. There were few places on the control card where there is a suspicion of tampering. So all the integrated cards have been removed and sealed in the presence of all the members and the same were sent for testing. The test report shows that the dispensing unit is in order and within the permissible limits with all the seals intact without any tampering. Even though the seals were intact and delivery of the dispensing unit was correct, inspection team has suspended the sales of MS/HSD from one dispensing unit from 04.09.2020. Even after lapse of four years, the respondents neither reviewed nor revoked the suspension of the dispensing unit. He further submits that once the seal is found to be as intact the dealer cannot be held responsible for any error or defect. Moreover, the dealer cannot access the internal mechanism of dispensing unit.
4(a). Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per the letter dated 04.09.2020 addressed by the inspection teams, the sales from the dispensing unit were stopp
Public authorities must adhere to principles of natural justice and allow due process before terminating contracts or rights.
Termination of dealership - Action of termination against critical irregularities has to be approved by Regional Head/State Head/Zonal Head of the Oil Company (General Manager and above) and in respe....
Judicial review in technical matters is limited; courts should defer to expert findings unless proven arbitrary or unreasonable.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that when an alternative and efficacious remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner, the court may decline to entertain a writ petition.
The judgment established that administrative decisions based on misreading of documents, ignorance of evidence, and without recording reasons are arbitrary and violative of principles of natural just....
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.