Bombay High Court
Kishor Baburao Sathe vs The Union Of India Through Its Principal ... on 18 September, 2025
Author: R. G. Avachat
Bench: R. G. Avachat
2025:BHC-AUG:25238-DB
1 904 WP 6848-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
904 WRIT PETITION NO. 6848 OF 2024
Kishor Baburao Sathe
VERSUS
1. The Union Of India Through Its Principal Secretary,
2. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.,
3. The District Collector, Office Osmanabad,
4. The Superintendent of Police, Osmanabad,
5. Sub Divisional Police Officer, Office Tuljapur.
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Jagtap Amol T.
AGP for Respondents-State: Ms. K. B. Patil Bharaswadkar
Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Rajesh H. Mewara
Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Ms. Anjali Dube
...
CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT &
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
Dated : SEPTEMBER 18, 2025
JUDGMENT :
- (Per ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of both the
parties.
2. The short question involved in this writ petition is whether, in
absence of any statutory provision, the Additional Collector,
Osmanabad, can refuse to issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to
2 904 WP 6848-2024
the petitioner, despite the issuance of a Letter of Intent in favour of
the petitioner for allotment of a retail outlet (petrol pump).
3. Pursuant to the advertisement dated 25/11/2018, the
petitioner submitted an application for award of a retail dealership of
respondent No.2 - Hindustan Petroleum Corporation. Upon being
found qualified, respondent No.2 - Hindustan Petroleum Corporation
issued a Letter of Intent in favour of the petitioner and awarded a
retail outlet dealership vide Letter of Intent dated 24/06/2020, for
Gut No.160, village Suratgaon, Taluka Tuljapur, District Osmanabad.
After the issuance of the Letter of Intent, the petitioner, along with
other requisite NOCs, applied to the District Magistrate (Additional
Collector), Osmanabad, seeking an NOC.
4. However, by the impugned communication dated 28/08/2023,
the Additional Collector informed the petitioner that since two crimes
were registered against him, Crime No.304/2017 for offences
punishable under Sections 143, 149, 353, 504, 506 of the Indian
Penal Code, and Crime No.56/2016 for offences punishable under
Sections 120-B, 323, 504, 506, 143, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, he
could not issue an NOC in favour of the petitioner. The Additional
Collector further intimated respondent No.2 - Hindustan Petroleum
Corporation accordingly.
3 904 WP 6848-2024
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned AGP for the State, and the learned counsel for respondent
No.2 - Hindustan Petroleum Corporation.
6. An affidavit in reply has been filed on behalf of respondent
No.3 - Additional Collector, Osmanabad, reiterating the grounds on
which the NOC was refused. It is contended that since two crimes are
registered against the petitioner, the office of respondent No.3
declined to issue the NOC.
7. On the other hand an affidavit in reply has been filed by
respondent No.2 - Hindustan Petroleum Corporation and have stated
in the affidavit that though respondent No.2 - Hindustan Petroleum
Corporation specifically drew the attention of respondent No.3 to
Clause 14(c) of the Letter of Intent dated 24/06/2020, which provides
that the dealership may be withdrawn or cancelled only if the Letter
of Intent holder is convicted of any crime or economic offence
involving moral turpitude, the Additional Collector still proceeded to
issue the impugned communication.
8. Having considered the rival submissions, the short point that
falls for our consideration is whether, in the absence of any clause in
the advertisement or in the Letter of Intent barring issuance of an
4 904 WP 6848-2024
NOC merely on the ground of registration of crimes, the Additional
Collector could have lawfully refused to grant the NOC.
9. We find that neither the advertisement pursuant to which the
petitioner applied, nor the Letter of Intent issued by respondent No.2
- Hindustan Petroleum Corporation, contained any stipulation
precluding issuance of an NOC on the ground that criminal cases
were registered against the petitioner. On the contrary, Clause 14(c)
of the Letter of Intent explicitly provides that only upon conviction
the dealership would be liable to be cancelled.
10. In view of this, the Additional Collector could not have refused
issuance of an NOC merely on the ground of registration of crimes
against the petitioner. The denial of NOC in the present case is
therefore wholly unjustified. No statutory provision has been brought
to our notice by any of the respondents authorising non-issuance of
NOC merely on account of registration of criminal cases.
11. In light of the above discussion, we pass the following order:
ORDER
(A) The impugned communication dated 28/08/2023 issued by
respondent No.3 - Additional District Collector, Osmanabad,
refusing to grant an NOC in favour of the petitioner for Gut
No.160 of village Suratgaon, Taluka Tuljapur, District,
Osmanabad, allotted to the petitioner, is quashed and set
aside.
5 904 WP 6848-2024
(B) Respondent No.3 - Additional District Collector,
Osmanabad, is directed to issue the NOC in favour of the
petitioner, as prayed for, within a period of three weeks from
today.
The Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
( ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. ) ( R. G. AVACHAT, J. )
vj gawade/-.
