2008 Supreme(Raj) 1845
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Vineet Kothari, J.
Tribhuvan Trading Co. - Appellant
Versus
State & Ors. - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2155 of 2006.
Decided On : 9-04-2008
Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Nitin Trivedi, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Sachin Acharya, Advocate.
Headnote:Rajasthan Petroleum Products (Licensing and Control) Order, 1990, Clause 3(5) – This was a matter relating to the opening of a petroleum products outlet. District collector issued no objection certificate with certain conditions. It was argued that issuing no – objection – certificate for opening of petroleum product retail outlet cannot be restricted under any provision. The high court dismissed the petition and stated that the said certificate cannot be validily assaided.
JUDGMENT
1. - By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the No Objection Certificate issued by the District Collector, Nagaur dated 4.4.2006 (Annex. 6) in favour of respondent No. 4 M/s. Essar Oil Limited for opening a petroleum outlet at Khasra No. 385/132, Village Sanwarad, Tehsil Ladnu, Distt. Nagaur.
2. The only ground pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is violation of Clause 3(5) of the Rajasthan Petroleum Products (Licensing and Control) Order, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as 'Control Order, 1990') which is reproduced hereunder :
"(5) In the rural areas, where no authorised outlet dealer for high speed diesel exists, barrel point dealers can sell high speed diesel in such areas under such directions which may be issued by the Government or District Collector from time to time :
Provided that no license shall be issued to carry on business as a barrel point dealer within a radius of 10 kms of any regular diesel retail outlet of any oil company."
3. The proviso of the said Clause 3(5) of the Control Order, 1990 stipulates that no license shall be given to a barrel point dealer within the radius of 10 kms of any regular diesel outlet of any oil company. Neither the said proviso nor any other specific provision of the said Control Order has been pointed out which restricts giving of 'No Objection Certificate' for opening a petroleum retail outlet. The converse situation to the one envisaged in the said proviso is not necessarily prohibited, as is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The 'No Objection Certificate' given in favour of respondent No. 4, subject to certain conditions by the District Magistrate therefore, cannot be validly assailed on a true and correct interpretation of the said Clause 3 (5) of the Control Order, 1990.
4. The writ petition is devoid of any merit. The same is hereby dismissed. No costs.Writ petition dismissed.
*******
Click Here to Read the rest of this document