[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
M/S Siyaram Filling Station Shahnagar ... vs Union Of India on 9 December, 2025
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:64433
1 WP-19524-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 9 th OF DECEMBER, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 19524 of 2018
M/S SIYARAM FILLING STATION SHAHNAGAR PANNA
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Samresh Katare - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Sandeep Vyas - Advocate for the respondents/ Union of India.
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed
seeking following reliefs:-
5.1. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ
of Certiorari and Struck of the Amendment of
Marketing Discipline Guidelines dated 02.10.2017
(Annexure P-4) as are unsustainable and illegal.
5.2. Since, the amendment is beyond the technical
imagination and is not practicable to be adopted such
the amendment does not contain any mechanism or
states as to how, 100% accuracy can be achieved when
the MS/HSD and more specifically the MS are highly
volatile in nature and the aspect of evaporation cannot
be ruled out for the same. On this ground too, the
amendment deserves to be struck down.
5.3. That, any provision, notification, rules are
otherwise any directions shall be practical in nature to
be followed, clear mechanism should be drawn and
should be balancing in nature for counter parts not
unilateral and illogical, which, the instant amendment
is, therefore, on this ground also the Amendment
deserves to be struck down.
5.4. Any other and further relief/relieves, order/orders,
direction/directions, which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and
thus render justice.
5.5. Any other and further relief /relieves, order/orders,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:64433
2 WP-19524-2018
direction/directions, which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and
thus render justice.
It is pointed out that the identical issues were considered by different
High Courts and orders were passed. The said order was considered by this
Court in similar petition being W.P. No.19346/2017 vide order dated
10/03/2022 in analogous hearing with other petitions and dismissed the
same. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed in
W.P. No.19346/2017 is applicable to the facts of the present petition also.
Learned counsel appearing for respondents/ Union of India could not
dispute the aforesaid proposition.
A co-ordinate Bench of this Court while dismissing W.P.
No.19346/2017 vide order dated 10/03/2022 has observed as under:-
"While considering the Transfer Petition (Civil)
No.2206/2017 and other connected transfer petitions,
Hon'ble Supreme Court on 27.11.2017 since was of the
view that instead of allowing the transfer petitions, it was
expedient to direct one of the High Courts to decide the lis
of similar nature first, Delhi High court was requested to
decide W.P.(C)No.10334 of 2017. Said Writ Petition was
decided and allowed in favour of the petitioners turning
down the impugned amendments as aforesaid. The
judgment passed by learned Single Judge has been subject
matter of LPA24/2021 and CM Appl.1843/2021 and other
connected LPS heard on 24.11.2021 by the Division Bench
of the Delhi High Court and the judgment has been
delivered on 10.01.2022. The relevant part of the judgment
necessary for disposal of this petition is quoted below :
"85. We are in complete agreement with the learned
Single Judge that this is a matter which is best left to
the discretion of the ROs Manager, who, we are
sanguine, would be best suited to decide to whom the
facility is to be extended. To this extent, the reading
down of Clause 5.1.14 (b) of the MDG-2017, by the
learned Single Judge, is upheld.
86. As a cumulative effective of aforesaid facts,
reasons and judicial pronouncements, we hereby
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:64433
3 WP-19524-2018
uphold the amendments to MDG-2012, incorporated
on 03.10.2017, except to the limited extent as
mentioned in paragraph 85, hereinabove and set aside
the impugned judgment, passed by the learned Single
Judge in WP (C) No.10334/2017, W.P.
(C)No.10746/2017 and W.P.(C)No.11246/2017, dated
18.03.2020."
In view of the aforesaid authoritative pronouncement of
law, this Court has no reason to disagree with the same.
Accordingly, the instant Writ Petitions stand dismissed to
the aforesaid extent."
Under these circumstances, this petition is also dismissed in terms of
order dated 10/03/2022 passed in W.P. No.19346/2017.
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
Shbhnkr
