Anand & Co. Through: Its ... vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 1538 Del

$~32
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                      Judgment delivered on: 22.03.2017

+        W.P.(C) 2608/2017
ANAND & CO. THROUGH: ITS PROPRIETOR                                ..... Petitioner
                             versus

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. & ORS                               ..... Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner    :      Brig. M.L. Khattar and Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, Advocates

For the Respondent    :      Mr. Paramjeet K. Benipal, Adv.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                                JUDGMENT

22.03.2017

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

CM No. 11299/2017 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 2608/2017 & CM No. 11298/2017

1. The petitioner seeks a quashing of letter dated 18.03.2015 and

also seeks waiver of the remaining period of one year out of three

years of placing the petitioner in holiday list vide order dated

18.03.2015.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

would be satisfied in case the respondents were to consider reducing

the period of debarment and waiving the period of remaining one year

as imposed vide order dated 18.03.2015.

3. In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in M/s Kulja

Industries Ltd. Vs. Chief Gen. Manager W.T. Proj. BSNL & Ors.,

(2014) 14 SCC 731 the Supreme Court has held that with regard to

the period of blacklisting, the court ought not to itself determine the

time period but remit the matter to the authority to do so having

regard to the attendant facts and circumstances.

4. In view of the above, the petitioner is granted liberty to file a

representation with the respondents requesting for waiver of the

remaining period of one year.

5. The representation be filed within a period of one week. On

such a representation being filed, the respondents shall consider the

same in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period

of three weeks. The respondents would also afford an opportunity to

the petitioner to appear either personally or through an authorized

representative to make submissions in support of his representation.

6. It is clarified that this court has not expressed any opinion on

the merits of the contentions of the petitioner seeking waiver and the

authorities are at liberty to consider the same in accordance with law

without being influenced by anything stated in this order.

7. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.

8. Copy of order be given Dasti under signatures of the Court

Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MARCH 22, 2017 'rs'