Raj Singh Dahiya vs Union Of India & Anr.
2014 Latest Caselaw 5613 Del

          *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                   Date of decision: 10th November, 2014

+                               LPA 580/2014

       RAJ SINGH DAHIYA                                     .... Appellant
                    Through:          Mr. Gautam Awasthi with Mr. Ayush
                                      Chaudhary & Mr. Abhinav Tripathi,
                                      Advs.

                                  Versus

    UNION OF INDIA & ANR.                  ..... Respondents

Through: Mr. Akshay Makhija with Mr. Rohitendra Deb, Ms. Sanjogeeta Mokhtar & Ms. Mahima Bahl, Advs.

for R-1.

Ms. Purnima Maheshwari, Adv. for R-2.

CORAM:-

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J

1. This intra-court appeal impugns the order dated 13th May, 2014 of the

learned Single Judge of dismissal in limine of W.P.(C) No.3005/2014

preferred by the appellant. The said writ petition was preferred seeking a

direction to the respondent no.2 GAIL Gas Ltd. to fix the price of

Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) in a fair and non-discriminatory manner, in

accordance with reasonable and just policy and for supply of CNG to the

appellant, a dealer of the respondent no.2, at Sonepat, Haryana on the 'Base

Rate plus Value Added Tax (VAT)' basis and for a direction to the

respondent no.1 Union of India (UOI) to inquire into the conduct of the

officials of the respondent no.2 in arbitrarily fixing / revising the price of

CNG. The grievance of the appellant was that the respondent no.2 was

supplying CNG at Kota, Firozabad, Meerut and Sonepat at different rates

and which was resulting in the appellant losing business at its CNG station

in Sonepat to another nearby CNG station in Delhi which was retailing CNG

at Rs.10 less than what the appellant was retailing at, owing to the high

supply cost of CNG to the appellant. The learned Single Judge dismissed

the writ petition observing that the issue of pricing is normally to be left to

the discretion of the Executive and the Court could interfere only when the

price fixed was arbitrary or based on extraneous considerations and that the

appellant has placed no material on record to show that the price so fixed

was arbitrary or based on extraneous consideration. Reliance in this regard

was placed on Balco Employees' Union (Regd.) Vs. Union of India (2002)

2 SCC 333.

2. The appeal came up before us first on 5th September, 2014 when,

finding the appellant to have inspite of the aforesaid reasoning given by the

learned Single Judge for dismissal of the petition, in the memorandum of

appeal still not having given any particulars, we enquired from the counsel

for the appellant as to what are the laws, rules and regulations regarding

fixation of price of CNG by the respondent no.2. On request of the counsel

for the respondent, the matter was adjourned to 29th September, 2014.

3. Even during the hearing on 29th September, 2014 the appellant did not

produce anything save handing over extracts of the Petroleum and Natural

Gas Regulatory Board Act, 2006 particularly of Sections 11 and 12 thereof

dealing with functions and powers of the PNGRB including of resolution of

disputes.

4. A perusal of the memorandum of appeal as well as the writ petition

also shows a total non application of mind in drafting thereof. In fact,

passages in both are found to have been lifted / pasted from the letters /

representations earlier addressed / made by the appellant to the respondent

no.2.

5. The learned Single Judge is fully justified in observing that the

petition lacks in material particulars and no challenge to the price fixed can

be made merely by alleging the same to be causing loss to the appellant.

There is thus no merit in the appeal which is dismissed.

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J

CHIEF JUSTICE

NOVEMBER 10, 2014 'gsr'..