Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Harjeet Kaur vs Shri Kannulal Agrawal on 12 March, 2021
Author: Anjuli Palo
1 MP-1611-2020
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MP-1611-2020
(SMT. HARJEET KAUR Vs SHRI KANNULAL AGRAWAL AND OTHERS)
2
Jabalpur, Dated : 12-03-2021
Shri N.K. Salunke, counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Gaurav Tiwari, Panel Lawyer for respondent No. 2/State.
Heard on admission.
Issue notice to respondent No. 1 by both, registered as well as
ordinary, modes on payment of process fee within seven working days,
returnable within four weeks.
Heard on I.A. No.3627/2020, which is an application for stay of
impugned orders (Annexure P-1) dated 23.5.2019 passed by Commissioner,
Narmadapuram Division, Hoshangabad in Case No. 64/Appeal/18-19 and
(Annexure P-2) dated 8.8.2019 passed by Commissioner, Narmadapuram
Division, Hoshangabad in Case No. 2/Review/2019-20.
The facts of the case, in short, are that the petitioner had applied for
No Objection Certificate before the Collector, Hoshangabad for
establishment a petrol pump outlet of Essar Oil Limited on the land bearing
Khasra No. 67/2, 67/8, 67/9 and 67/10 area 0.688 hectaresituated at Village
Shobhapur, Tehsil Sohagpur, which was granted on 14.12.2018. Being
aggrieved by the said order, respondent No. 1 preferred an appeal before the
Commissioner, Narmadapuram Division, Hoshangabad on the ground that
since the distance between the petrol pumps of the appellant and respondent
No. 1 is about 30 meter, therefore, the said No Objection Certificate was
granted in violation of the instructions of the Government Of India and the
Government of M.P., which was allowed and the No Objection Certificate
issued by respondent No. 2 was set aside vide order Annexure P-1 dated
23.5.2019. Against the said order, the petitioner filed a review, which was
dismissed, therefore, this petition has been filed.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and gone through
2 MP-1611-2020
the impugned orders. The Indore Bench of this Court vide order dated
11.1.2013 passed in W.P. No. 7123/2011 referring the judgment of A Division
Bench of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Environment Society
of India, Chandigarh and another Vs. Administrator, Chandigarh
Administration, Union Territory, Chandigarh and others reported in
AIR 1998 Punjab and Haryana 94 and the judgment of Mahtab Ahmad
Vs. Union of India Through Principal Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum
and others in W.P. No. 43483 of 2010 has observed as under :-
12. Keeping in view the aforesaid judgment delivered by
the Allahabad High Court Court in the case of Mahtab Ahmad
(supra), this Court is of the considered opinion that the
guidelines framed by the India Road Congress are not at all
statutory guidelines and which can be enforced by this Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Resultantly, the
impugned order based upon the guidelines framed by the Indian
Road Congress is accordingly quashed. In the present case, no
other reason has been assigned by the resondent No. 3 for
denying the NOC to the petitioner and therefore, as this Court
has quashed the impugned order, the petitioner and the
respondent No. 1 shall be free to establish a retail outlet as they
have already obtained NOCs from various other authorities in
accordance with law.
Thus, in the light of the order passed by Indore Bench of this Court on
11.1.2013 in W.P. No. 7123/2011, it is directed that the operation and effect
of impugned orders (Annexure P-1) dated 23.5.2019 passed by
Commissioner, Narmadapuram Division, Hoshangabad in Case No.
64/Appeal/18-19 and (Annexure P-2) dated 8.8.2019 passed by
Commissioner, Narmadapuram Division, Hoshangabad in Case No.
2/Review/2019-20 shall remain stayed till next date of hearing.
List after four weeks.
3 MP-1611-2020
(SMT. ANJULI PALO)
JUDGE
PB
Digitally signed by
PRADYUMNA BARVE
Date: 2021.03.16
10:53:00 +05'30'
