SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(MP) 732

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT JABALBUR BENCH
A.M.Khanwilkar, Krishn Kumar Lahoti, JJ.
Garima Gas Agency, Itarsi - Appellant
Versus
Indian Oil Corporation & others - Respondent
Writ Petition No.46-2012
Decided On : 10-01-2014

Advocates Appeared:
For the petitioner:Shri P.N.Dubey, Advocate
For the respondent No.1:Shri Virendra Verma, Advocate

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner had no right under the initial agreement to claim distributorship for the Itarsi area, which was designated for a reserved category candidate.

Headnote:

Notification - Distributorship Dispute - Agreement dated 31st March, 1994 - [No specific act sections referenced]

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner challenges a notification by Indian Oil Corporation regarding the allotment of distributorship at Itarsi, District Hoshangabad, which is presently managed by the petitioner. The petitioner was initially allotted distributorship for the area of Hoshangabad, but later the Corporation intended to allot distributorship to a reserved category person for the area of Itarsi, which is outside the area of operation referred to in the initial agreement. The petitioner was subsequently given the distributorship for the Itarsi area, but complaints were received, leading to the Corporation issuing an advertisement to invite applications for allotting regular distributorship for Itarsi area, which was to be given to a reserved category candidate.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner had no right under the initial agreement to assert a claim for the Itarsi area, which was earmarked for a reserved category candidate. The court also dismissed the petitioner's argument of malice and found the challenge in the petition devoid of merits.

Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner's right to claim distributorship for the Itarsi area and the allegations of malice against the Indian Oil Corporation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner had no right under the initial agreement to claim distributorship for the Itarsi area, which was designated for a reserved category candidate. The court also found the allegations of malice unsubstantiated.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, stating that the challenge was devoid of merits and allowed the petitioner to resort to appropriate remedy for recovery of loss caused due to starting the unit for the Itarsi area.

Judgment

Krishn Kumar Lahoti, J.

Per A.M. Khanwilkar, Chief Justice :

This petition takes exception to the Notification dated 16th November, 2011, Annexure P/1, whereby the Indian Oil Corporation intended to allot the distributorship at Itarsi, District Hoshangabad, which is presently managed by the petitioner.

2. The background in which the said Notification has been issued is that the petitioner was allotted distributorship for area of Hoshangabad (within municipal limits) vide Memorandum of Agreement dated 31st March, 1994. Later on, the Indian Oil Corporation intended to allot distributorship to reserved category person for area Itarsi, which is outside the area of operation referred to in the Agreement dated 31st March, 1994. However, no response was received from the reserved category. The Indian Oil Corporation, therefore, proceeded to allot the said distributorship to one M/s Avirat Gas Distributor of Hoshangabad.

However, the said agency failed to fulfill the requirement specified by the Indian Oil Corporation and expressed its inability to take up distributorship for Itarsi area. As a result, the Department prepared a proposal for restructuring of Operational Area, Annexure P/4, the relevant extract of the same reads thus : “PROPOSAL Under the above mentioned circumstances, it is proposed that :

     a. M/s Garima Gas may be given the distribution of Itarsi market with effect from 16.08.99.

b. M/s Garima Gas will arrange for a proper showroom, staff, mechanic and deliver boys immediately.

c. Till such time, the godown is constructed and licensed, M/s Garima Gas will carry the refills from their godown at Hoshangabad in their won arrangement and cost. 100% Home delivery will be made to the customers.

d. M/s Garima Gas will make arrangement for a godown with 8000 Kgs capacity latest by 31.10.99 and after the same the refill supply will be effected from the plant to M/s Garima Gas at Itarsi as Itarsi is already a existing industry market.

Sub: Restructuring of Operational Area - M/s Avirat Gas Distributor, Hoshangabad.

RECOMMENDATIONS Since the action as proposed above, is warranted due to inability of M/s Avirat Gas to meet the customer needs and is in the best interest of the Corporate image, the above restructuring/realignment may be approved by Area Manager, Bhopal.”

3. On the basis of this proposal, the distributorship for area Itarsi was given to the petitioner, as extended work for distributorship of Hoshangabad, in addition to the area referred to in the Agreement dated 31st March, 1994. However, when complaints were received that such extension was not permissible and tantamounts to backdoor entry of the petitioner, the Corporation on re-examination of the situation decided to issue advertisement to invite applications for allotting regular distributorship for Itarsi area. The petitioner did not submit his application, as obviously, he was not eligible because the advertisement predicates that only reserved category candidate may apply for distributorship. The question is; whether the petitioner has any right under the Agreement dated 31st March, 1994, whereby the distributorship for area of Hoshangabad (within municipal limits) was allotted to the petitioner, for the additional area of Itarsi. Indisputably, Itarsi area is independent and not within the area of operation of Hoshangabad (within municipal limits). Moreover, as per the policy of the Indian Oil Corporation, distributorship for that area must be given to reserved category candidate. There is no provision in the Agreement dated 31st March, 1994 which enures any right in favour of the petitioner to assert his claim for Itarsi area, which is earmarked for reserved category candidate. Suffice it to observe that the petitioner has no right whatsoever under the Agreement dated 31st March, 1994 in this behalf nor he can claim that the distributorship for the area Itarsi was allotted to him on permanent or regular basis. There is no averment in the writ petition that









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top