JUDGMENT

Dr. A.K.RATH, J. - In this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order dated 25.6.2009 passed by the appellate authority, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Mumbai-opposite party no.4, vide Annexure-13. By the said order, the opposite party no.4 confirmed the order dated 15.1.2009 passed by the Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Sambalpur D.O., Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.,-opposite party no.1, vide Annexure-10, terminating the dealership of the petitioner.

2. The case of the petitioner is that pursuant to the dealership agreement dated 20.2.2007, vide Annexure-1, he was running a petrol and diesel outlet at Borigumma in the district of Koraput in the name and style of “Keshari Service Station”. The retail outlet is situated at a distance of 17 K.Ms. from Jeypore. He had taken every effort to meet the standards prescribed by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as “the IOCL”). Though several inspections and checks were made by the IOCL, Police and Civil Supplies Department, but no irregularities were pointed out or detected. On 12.6.2008, the Divisional Manager (RS), Sambalpur Division visited the retail outlet in absence of the petitioner, inspected the petrol pump, found the irregularities, immediately stopped the sale of products and suspended the supply of the products to the retail outlet. On the very same day, a letter was issued to the petitioner directing to explain the reasons about the discrepancies detected during the visit of opposite party no.1, which is quoted hereunder:-

“During our visit to your RO on 12.06.2008 along with AM (RS)/Bgh; SRSM, OSO & Sr.Depot Mgr, Berhampur; the following discrepancies were observed:

(1) Stock variation of MS in MS Tank-1 was beyond permissible limit;

(2) The entries made in DSR do not match with the invoices of the products you have received.

This is a violation of MDG-2005

You are advised to

(i) Stop sale of all products with immediate effect.

(ii) Explain the reasons for the above violation within seven days of receipt of this letter.

Kindly note that supply of products to your RO is being suspended temporarily till you reply. Sample of all products are being collected from your RO for testing at lab.

The Dip and Meter reading of DU as noted now is as below:

MS:Dip=48.0 cm. DU-1=750308.0 DU-2=105733 ( L& T Duo unit)

XM=T-1=Dip-75.8 DU-1=2726549 ( Midco 981)

XM-T-2=Dip=3.8 cm; DUI=18142 DU2=12010 (STP DUO Unit)

This is without any prejudice to the rights of the Corporation.”

3. On 16.6.2008, the petitioner submitted his reply stating therein that the retail outlet is situated near Jayantgiri, Borigumma, which is at a distance of 17 Kms. from Jeypore. For the last eight years, every effort was made to meet the standards prescribed by the IOCL. During all these years, the outlet was inspected by the Officers of the IOCL, Police personnel and Civil Supply Authorities. At no point of time any irregularities or any kind of discrepancies were ever pointed out or detected. It is further stated that on the date of inspection, he has received 4 KL MS, which had not been taken into account while the stock was verified. Though the stock was unloaded in the outlet, the staffs of the tanker carrying the challan had gone to the nearby hotel for taking lunch. The staffs of the retail outlet could not show the challan regarding receipts of 4 KL MS. This lapse is on the part of the employee. If receipts of 4 KL MS is taken into account, there would be no discrepancy. The staff, who was present at the time of inspection, was a newly appointee and was not well versed with the maintenance of entries in the Daily Stock Register (‘DSR’ in short). The mistake occurred was unintentional and by inadvertence and the same will not occur in future. In continuance of the earlier reply, again on 12.7.2008 the petitioner submitted his reply stating that on the date of inspection, he has received 4 KL MS & 7.5. KL Xtra Mile. As per the procedure, th