Judgment

Dr. A. K. Rath, J.

By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have challenged, inter alia, the order dated 7.6.2011 passed by the Appellate Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Mumbai, vide Annexure-5. By the said order, the appellate authority confirmed the order dated 27.10.2008 passed by the Senior Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Bhubaneswar, opposite party no.3, vide Annexure-2 whereby and whereunder the dealership agreement dated 12.5.1982 of the petitioner no.1 was terminated.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioners is that pursuant to dealership agreement dated 14.5.1982, petitioner no.1 was appointed as dealer by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as “the IOCL”) for sale of petroleum products at the retail outlet owned by IOCL in the name and style of M/s.Saila Service Station at Raj Bhawan Square, Bhubaneswar. He wanted to establish another retail outlet at Tamando and sent a letter to the IOCL on 2.9.1991. The IOCL asked the Chief Engineer, National Highway Authority to approve the site plan. The National Highway Authority issued license to him on 4.6.1992 to use the national highway to