The Court held that the guidelines framed by the respondents were not ultra vires, unconstitutional and arbitrary as they were framed in pursuance to Clause 43 of the Agreement between the parties and were framed for public good.

( 1 ) THIS judgment will dispose of two petitions, C. W. P. No. 2876/ 1998 and C. W. P. No. 5753/1998 as common questions arise for consideration in these petitions.

( 2 ) THE first petition, C. W. P. No. 2876/1998 impugns the revised Marketing Discipline Guidelines which became effective from 12th May, 1998 and the second petition C. W. P. No. 5753/1998 challenges the same guidelines as well as the earlier guidelines issued in the year 1995.

( 3 ) PETITIONER No. 1 in the first petition is stated to be an Association of about 300 persons who are running petroleum products retail outlets commonly known as petrol filling-cum-service stations. There are four Oil Companies which are under the control of the respondent, namely. Ministry of Petroleum and Oil and Natural Gas, Government of India. These companies are as follows :

(A) Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (b) I. B. P. Company Ltd. (e) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (d) Hindustan Petroleum Corporation.

( 4 ) IT is next stated that all the above four Government companies are under the control of Ministry of Petroleum and Oil and Natural and have been given the responsibility for sale and distribution of motor spirit commonly known as high speed diesel and other petroleum products through retail outlets. The said respondent is empowered to take the decision for opening of new retail outlets and the proportionate allocation of the above mentioned four Oil Companies. The Oil Companies, on the basis of the allocation made by the respondent Ministry appoints dealers for the opening of new retail outlets, inmost of the cases, by developing and employing all the necessary infrastructure, plant and machinery etc. at the retail outlets. Thereafter the Oil Companies enter into a dealership agreement with the concerned person for running the retail outlets. As such all the members of petitioner No. 1 are operating retail outlets with a dealership agreement with the aforesaid Oil Companies. The agreement incorporates in detail the terms and conditions on which members of petitioner No. 1 are under an obligation to run their retail outlets. Their activities are governed and regulated by those terms and conditions which form part of the dealership agreement. A specimen copy of the dealership agreement is tiled as Annexure-P1 to the writ petition. It is next submitted that the field relating to import, transport, storage, production, reviving and blending of petroleum is governed by the provisions of Petroleum Act, 1934 and also Petroleum Rules, 1976 as made under the Act. A perusal of the Act and the rules will show that the Legislature has laid down effective mechanism and control relating to supply of petroleum products, maintenance of the quality during the distribution thereof. The petroleum retail outlets are also subject to the provisions of the Weights and Measures Act. The application of the enactments as referred to above is elaborated in paragraphs 9, 10 and 11 of Civil Writ Petition No. 2876/1998 which read as follows :

"9. That the petitioners respectfully reiterate that all the oil dispensing units which are installed at the petroleum pump are installed and maintained by the respective Oil Companies. These dispensing units are continuously managed by the Oil Companies with the co-operation of the officers under the Weights and Measures Act. In fact, it is the officers who work under the Weights and Measures and who calibrate and seal these dispensing unit which has been installed at the petroleum retail outlets by the respective oil industries.

10. That the petitioners respectfully submit that for proper supply, distribution and maintaining the quality, these legislative provisions provide a complete and self-contained code and does not require the invocation of any other legislative provision. In view of these specific legislation provided by the Legislature, it is respectful submission of the petitioner, that the respondent is not required to resort/have recourse