Point of Law: Locus Standi of rival business - A rival businessman cannot file a writ petition, challenging the setting-up of a similar unit by another businessman, on the ground that establishing a rival business close to his business-place would adversely affect his business interest, even if the setting-up of the new unit is in violation of law.

JUDGMENT :

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the 2nd respondent in Ref. No. Mu. Mu. No. 25271/2019/C2 dated 20.12.2019 and quash the same as the same is arbitrary, illegal and non-est in the eyes of law.

1. The points for consideration in this writ petition are whether:

(a) The Indian Road Congress Guidelines, 2009 stipulating a minimum distance of 300 meters between two petrol bunks in a non-urban rural area is mandatory.

(b) Whether a rival competitor has locus-standi to challenge the No Objection Certificate issued to another competitor for setting up a petrol bunk.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the impugned order passed by the second respondent granting No Objection Certificate to the fifth respondent to set up a petrol bunk suffers from material irregularities and violates the norms and Guidelines issued by the Union Ministry of Road Transport and Highways dated 25.09.2003 as well as the Indian Road Congress Guidelines, 2009.

3. It is also the case of the petitioner that the second respondent has placed wrong reliance on the orders passed in the batch of writ petitions by the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.

4. According to the petitioner, the petrol bunk proposed to be set up by the fifth respondent is within a distance of 170 meters from the petitioner's petrol bunk and hence the minimum distance criteria fixed under the Indian Road Congress Guidelines at 300 meters has been violated. According to the petitioner, this would endanger the lives of the people in and around that area as the object of those Guidelines are to ensure safe distance between the two retail outlets in order to avoid devastating effects in case of fire accidents.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that the second respondent without having regard to the safety aspect and prescribed Guidelines and order of the Division Bench of this Court has granted No Objection Certificate to the fifth respondent under the impugned order on flimsy grounds which is arbitrary and illegal.

6. It is the case of the official respondents as seen from the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent is that:

(a) Impugned order is legally correct and not arbitrary.

(b) The impugned order does not suffer from any material irregularity and does not violate the norms and Guidelines framed by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways.

(c) The impugned order has been passed based on the judgment rendered in a batch of writ petitions before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.

(d) There is no partiality in favour of any person and the second respondent has acted as per law and as per the rules laid in the Petroleum Act and Rules.

(e) The petitioner is dragging the issue for his business rivalry.

(f) The petitioner ought to have filed Statutory Appeal before the Statutory Appellate Authority but instead has filed this writ petition which is not maintainable.

(g) The third respondent is not the Authority in the matter and the remarks of the third respondent was overruled by the second respondent under the impugned order.

(h) The fourth respondent has obtained all the requisite permission to establish the subject petrol bunk in the subject land.

7. The fifth respondent which has been allotted subject petrol bunk by the fourth respondent would submit that:

(a) Indian Road Congress Guidelines are not mandatory and would submit that the impugned order has been passed granting No Objection Certificate correctly by applying the decision of the Division Bench of the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in W.P. (MD) Nos. 705, 2661, 3678, 19218 of 2019 dated 17.10.2019 wherein it has been held that the Indian Road Congress Guidelines are not mandatory as it will get statutory force only when appropriate rules are framed by the State Government.

8. It is also their case that Circulars and Letters are just communications between officials