Bombay High Court
Sanket S/O Ravindra Duragkar vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., ... on 25 January, 2024
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote, M. S. Jawalkar
2024:BHC-NAG:1019-DB
24-WP6044.22-J.odt
1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 6044 OF 2022
Sanket S/o Ravindra Duragkar, Petitioner
Occupation: Business, aged about 33
years, R/o.Plot NO.736, Duragkar
Bhawan, Mahal, Nagpur, Tahsil & Distt,
Nagpur.
-Vs.-
1. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Respondents
through its Chief Regional Manger,
Regional Office at : Khapri LPG Filing
Plant, Near Khapri Railway Station,
Khapri, Nagpur-441108.
2. Chief Regional Manager, Hindustan
Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Office at
Khapri LPG Filing Plant, Near Khapri
Railway Station, Khapri, Nagpur-
441108.
---------------------------------------------------------
Mr. A.M.Ghare, counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Akshay A. Naik, counsel for the respondents.
---------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE &
SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR, JJ.
DATE : 23RD JANUARY, 2024
ORAL JUDGMENT (P.C.)
Heard.
KHUNTE
24-WP6044.22-J.odt
2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. The petition is heard
finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
3. The petition questions the rejection of the application for
grant of Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG) Distributorship for site at
Dharampeth, Nagpur. The advertisement in this regard was issued on
29/09/2021, in pursuance to which the petitioner having lease in
respect of Plot No.184/1, admeasuring 5994 sq.ft. which was valid
upto 31/03/2035 (pg.100) had applied on 13/10/2021. The lots were
dawn on 03/03/2022 in which the petitioner was selected, which was
intimated to the petitioner on 05/03/2022. The petitioner thereafter
was asked to make a security deposit of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty
Thousand only) he did so on 08/03/2022. The above facts are not in
dispute. On 18/08/2022, the petitioner received a communication of
the same date (pg.104) indicating that his application was turned
down on the ground that an applicant was required to have a lease for
a minimum period of 15 years from the date of advertisement. This is
being questioned on the ground that the lease is in perpetuity on
account of the renewal clause contained therein.
4. A perusal of this deed of renewal of lease in respect to the
aforesaid property dated 28/08/2007 by which the term of the lease
has been renewed till 31/03/2035, would indicate that there is a
KHUNTE
24-WP6044.22-J.odt
renewal clause vide term No.8, where under the lessor has covenanted
that at the end of the term contained in the deed of renewal, and so
on, from time to time at the end of each successive further term of
years, the lease would be renewed, which would indicate that it is in
fact, in sum and substance a lease in perpetuity.
5. Mr. Naik, learned counsel for the respondents, fairly agrees
that this would be the effect of clause No.8 which is a renewal clause
contained in the deed of renewal dated 28/08/2007 (pg.102).
6. In that view of the matter, the rejection on account of the
renewal of the lease being only for a period of 13 years from the date
of renewal is clearly not justified, as the lease is in perpetuity. The
impugned communication dated 18/08/2022 (pg.104) is hereby
quashed and set aside and the respondents are directed to further
continue the process of granting an LPG Distributorship to the
petitioner if the petitioner is so qualified. The petition is accordingly
allowed in the above terms.
7. Rule is made absolute. No order as to costs.
(SMT.M.S.JAWALKAR, J) (A.G.GHAROTE, J)
Signed by: Mr. G.S. Khunte
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 25/01/2024 17:19:06 KHUNTE
