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

2023 Supreme(Cal) 506

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CHITTA RANJAN DASH, PARTHA SARATHI SEN, JJ.
Indian Oil Corporation Limited & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Paromita Bag & Ors. - Respondents
F.M.A. No. 288 of 2022
Decided On : 08-05-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. Jishnu Saha, Sr. Adv., Mr. Puspendu Chakraborty.
For the Respondents: Mr. Debabrata Saha Roy, Mr. Pingal Bhattacharyya, Mr. Subhankar Das, Mr. Neil Basu, Mr. Sankha Biswas.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1949 – Article 226, 14 – Registration Act, 1908 – Section 47 – Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Appeal - Equality before Law – Time from which registered document operates – Held, Court direct appellant/oil company to accept application of writ petitioner and proceed with same in accordance with Law on basis of fiction created in Section 47 of Registration Act 1908, that would not only be contrary to evolved rule of Administrative Law but also tantamount to clear violation of Article-14 of Constitution of India since there may be persons having similar footings who have not applied for distributorship because of rigor of norms as set up by appellant/oil company – Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT :

Partha Sarathi Sen, J.

1. In this intra-court appeal, the order dated November 14, 2019 as passed in WP. 17998(W) of 2019 by the Hon’ble Single Bench of this Hon’ble High Court in a proceeding under the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been assailed. By the impugned order, Hon’ble Single Bench allowed the writ petition of the writ petitioner who is the respondent No.1 herein and thereby set aside and quashed the letter dated August 26, 2019 as issued by the present appellant/ Indian Oil Corporation Limited hereinafter referred to as the ‘Oil company’ with a direction to the Oil Company to accept the land offered by the respondent no.1/writ petitioner and proceed with the application of the Writ Petitioner/Appellant in accordance with Law. The appellant/Oil company felt aggrieved and thus preferred the instant appeal.

2. For effective disposal of the instant appeal, the facts leading to filing of the aforementioned writ petition by the present respondent no.1 before the Hon’ble Single Bench is required to be discussed in a nutshell.

3. Pursuant to an advertisement as published in a newspaper, the writ petitioner/the respondent no.1 herein has applied for obtaining the LPG distributorship under the reserved category ‘SC (GP)’ for the location Balipore, District-Hooghly.

4. Before the Hon’ble Single Bench, it was the case of the writ petitioner/respondent No.1 herein that the properties which had been offered for godown construction and showroom were lease hold lands and those were executed and presented for registration on October 17, 2017 with the territorial office of Sub-Registrar but the registration of the said two lease hold lands were completed on November 14, 2017 which would be evident from the certificates of registration as issued by the concerned Sub-Registrar.

5. Before the Hon’ble Single Bench, it has been averred by the writ petitioner/respondent No.1 herein that since the last date of submission of the application for LPG Distributorship with the ‘Oil Company’ was October 18, 2017 and since as per the said Advertisement and as per standard norms of the ‘Brochure on Unified Guidelines for Selection of LPG Distributorship’ hereinafter after referred to as the ‘said Brochure’, the applicant should ‘own’ a plot of capacity of requisite dimensions and location for construction of LPG godown or own a ready LPG cylinder storage godown, the Appellant/Oil Company after field verification found that the date of registration of the proposed lands is November 14, 2017 which is after the last date of submission of application and thus by its letter dated August 26, 2019 rejected the candidature of the writ petitioner.

6. Mr. Jishnu Saha Learned Senior Advocate for the appellant/oil company in course of his argument at the very outset draws our attention to the photocopy of the Advertisement being Annexure-P/1 and the application of the writ petitioner being Annexure – P/2 of the paper book. Attention of this Court is also drawn to the copy of the said brochure being Annexure-p/1 of the stay application. It is argued by Mr. Saha, Learned senior Advocate for the oil company that it is undisputed that the cut off date of the filling of the application for LPG Distributorship was October18, 2017 and from the advertisement as well as from the said brochure it would reveal that for becoming a qualified applicant for the said Distributorship one of the paramount condition is that as on October18, 2017 the applicant must own a plot of land of requisite dimension and location. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant/oil company that from the copies of the registered deeds of lease, it would reveal that though the said deeds of lease were executed and presented on October 17, 2017 but the registration thereof was completed on November 14, 2017 and thus under no stretch of imagination it can be said that as on the day of cut off date, the writ petitioner/respondent no.1 was the lessee of the said plots o

          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 Back to top