2023 Supreme(Cal) 979

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
JAY SENGUPTA, J.
Maharaj Murmu – Petitioner
Versus
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. & Ors. – Respondents
WPA 22976 Of 2018
Decided On : 07-07-2023

The termination of the petitioner's dealership was valid as the petitioner was afforded sufficient opportunity of hearing, the order of termination was not unreasoned or cryptic, the authority of SGS Private Limited to carry out the marker test was not in doubt, there was no evidence to show that the marker test was discontinued because of any inherent defect in the test, and the failure in the marker test was not a result of contamination during the test but the HSD in the tank was already contaminated.

Headnote:

PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS REGULATORY BOARD - DEALERSHIP TERMINATION - SHOW CAUSE NOTICE - PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE - SGS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED - AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT MARKET TEST - MARKER TEST - ADULTERATION - DELAY - SGS INSPECTION - RETAIL OUTLET - BPCL - HSD - SKO - VALIDITY OF TERMINATION ORDER - DEALERSHIP AGREEMENT - MARKETING DISCIPLINE GUIDELINES, 2005 - APPOINTMENT OF SGS PVT. LTD. - RELIANCE ON JUDGMENTS - APPLICABILITY OF JUDGMENTS - INTERPRETATION OF DEALERSHIP AGREEMENT - AUTHORITY OF SGS PVT. LTD. - CONDUCT OF MARKET TEST - LEGALITY OF TERMINATION ORDER - PRINCIPLES OF EQUITY - CLEAN HANDS DOCTRINE - APPLICABILITY OF DELAY - GRAVITY OF MISCONDUCT - MAGNITUDE OF MISCONDUCT - REASONABLENESS OF DELAY - SUFFICIENCY OF HEARING - REASONED ORDER - PREJUDICE TO RETAILER - AUTHORITY OF SGS PRIVATE LIMITED - DISCONTINUATION OF MARKER TEST - CONTAMINATION DURING TEST - SUFFICIENCY OF FLUSHING - CAPACITY OF CONDITIONED METERING UNIT - COLLECTION OF SAMPLES - FAILURE OF SAMPLE AT LABORATORY TEST - VALIDITY OF TERMINATION ORDER - DISMISSAL OF WRIT PETITION.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a retail outlet dealer of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL), challenged the termination of his dealership due to alleged adulteration of HSD (high-speed diesel). The petitioner claimed that the inspection conducted by SGS India Private Limited, which found adulteration in the HSD sample, was flawed and that the termination order was passed without following the principles of natural justice. The petitioner also argued that the delay in concluding the proceedings vitiated the termination order.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the petitioner was afforded sufficient opportunity of hearing during the disciplinary proceeding and that there was no violation of principles of natural justice. The court also held that the order of termination and the appellate order affirming it were not unreasoned or cryptic. The court further held that the authority of SGS Private Limited to carry out the marker test was not in doubt and that there was no evidence to show that the marker test was discontinued because of any inherent defect in the test. The court also found that the failure in the marker test was not a result of contamination during the test but that the HSD in the tank was already contaminated.

Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner was afforded sufficient opportunity of hearing during the disciplinary proceeding and whether there was a violation of principles of natural justice. 2. Whether the order of termination and the appellate order affirming it were unreasoned or cryptic. 3. Whether the authority of SGS Private Limited to carry out the marker test was in doubt. 4. Whether the marker test was discontinued because of any inherent defect in the test. 5. Whether the failure in the marker test was a result of contamination during the test or whether the HSD in the tank was already contaminated.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The principles of natural justice were not violated as the petitioner was afforded sufficient opportunity of hearing during the disciplinary proceeding. 2. The order of termination and the appellate order affirming it were not unreasoned or cryptic. 3. The authority of SGS Private Limited to carry out the marker test was not in doubt. 4. There was no evidence to show that the marker test was discontinued because of any inherent defect in the test. 5. The failure in the marker test was not a result of contamination during the test but the HSD in the tank was already contaminated.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.