Madras High Court
M/S.Gothandapani Agencies(Ad ... vs The Senior Regional Manager on 14 September, 2023
2023/MHC/4304
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 14.09.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRVARTHY
W.A(MD)NOs.1546 to 1556 OF 2023
and
C.M.P(MD)Nos.
12079,12084,12096,12069,12072,12076,12065,12066,1207
8,12081 and 12082 of 2023
M/s.Gothandapani Agencies(Ad hoc),
Dealer, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited,
Trichy Region,Operated by Land Owner Mr.V.Prakash,
represented by Power Agent Mrs.P.Mahalakshmi,
No.367/1, Aladukkumulai Village,
Pattukkottai-Thanjavur Main Road,
Pattukkottai,
Thanjavur. :Appellant/Writ Petitioner
in W.A(MD)No.1546 of 2023
.vs.
The Senior Regional Manager,
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited,
Trichy Retail Regional Office,
No.90, II Floor, MSDR Enclave,
Bharathidasan Road,
Cantonment,
Trichy – 629 001. : Respondent/Respondent in
W.A(MD)No.1546 of 2023
PRAYER in W.A(MD)No.1546 of 2023 Writ Appeal filed under
Clause 15 of the Letters Patent praying this Court to set aside the
order passed by this Court in W.P(MD)No.15412of 2014, dated
06.07.2023.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2
For Appellant :Mr.Issac Mohanlal
in all W.As’ for M/s.Issac Chambers
For Respondent :Mr.M.Sridhar
COMMON JUDGMENT
****************
[Judgment of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR,J.]
The Petitioners in a batch of Writ Petitions in W.P(MD)Nos.
15412 to 15416 of 2014 etc batch are before this Court challenging
the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the Writ Petitions
filed by them for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to
quash the impugned orders and forbear the respondents therein
from in any manner interfering with the operation of the retail
outlets by the respective dealers in the place where they were
permitted earlier on temporary basis.
2.The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of the
Writ Appeals are as follows:
The change of policy of the Government of India is to regulate
the retail sales of petroleum and petroleum products under the
Essential Commodities Act, 1955, bypermitting the Oil Companies to
deal with the same. There were further periodical developments,
which ultimately lead to the creation of concept of Company Owned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Company Operated (COCO)Outlets so as to enable the National Oil
Companies to run and operate their own outlets, which were known
as ‘’Modern Retail Outlets’’. For the said purposes, lease agreements
were entered into with various land owners and impending further
change of policy, these land owners as well as in some cases, the
dealers of adjacent retail outlets were temporarily permitted to run
these outlets. When further change of policy decision was taken,
these land owners/temporarily permitted persons challenged the
same and ultimately, the matter reached the portals of the
Honourable Supreme Court of India and by a judgment in a batch of
cases in Mohammed Jamal .vs. Union of India reported in
(2014) 1 SCC 201, the Honourable Supreme Court of India
ultimately decided against the land owners/other temporary
contract holders that the doctrine of promissory estoppel or
legitimate expectation cannot be made applicable to these cases.
Pursuant to the said decision of the Honourable Supreme Court of
India, the orders impugned in the Writ Petitions were passed
terminating the contracts of the Writ Petitioners. Aggrieved by the
order passed by the learned Single Judge, the present batch of Writ
Petitions are filed.
3.The learned Single Judge holding that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Petitioners/appellants have no vested right, held that they cannot
as a matter of right cannot enjoy the running of retail outlets who
were originally granted temporary license. It is admitted before this
Court that the appellants were enjoying interim orders to the effect
that the respondents will not interfere with their possession till such
time oil companies appoint fresh dealers in the areas. It is to be
noted that the retail outlets are functioning well as on date and the
respondents did not dispute the requirement of these retail outlets
in the areas in which they exist as on date.
4.The learned standing counsel appearing for the
respondent/Oil Corporation submitted before this Court that they
have no inclination to disturb the existing operation of the retail
outlets, till such time, the dealers regularly appointed by the Oil
Companies will commence their operation. It is also admitted
before this Court that each one the appellants have given an
undertaking before the learned Single Judge. The learned Standing
Counsel for the respondent/Oil Company has also submitted that a
fresh affidavit may also be directed to be submitted by the
appellants to the Oil Corporation. The affidavit of undertaking given
by the appellants before the learned Single Judge reads as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
‘’4.I submit that no new steps have been taken
for allotment of the retail outlet dealership in favour
of any other person. As and when the Government of
India, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas
Commission and the respondents herein come out
with a new policy for grant of dealership in respect of
the existing retail outlets and on appointment of a
new dealer for the Retail Outlet on the basis of such
appointment in respect of the Retail Outlet at Avanam
Kaikatti, Pudukottai District, I undertake to vacate
and hand over the retail outlet to the Respondent
herein within a period of four weeks from the date of
such appointment of retail outlet dealership.’’
The appellants, who have now operated the retail outlets is on the
basis of the temporary license granted by the oil companies.
5.Recording the statement of the learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the respondent and the affidavit of undertaking given
by each one of the appellants, this Court is inclined to dispose of
the above Writ Appeals in the following lines:
1.The order of the learned Single Judge in all the Writ
petitions are set aside.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2.The respondent is directed to permit the appellants to
operate the retail outlets run by them on the basis of the temporary
license given to them till such time the respondent appoint regular
dealers under any scheme and till such time the regular dealers
commence their business.
3.Till issuance of letter of intent and till such time the regular
dealers were appointed by the respondent, pursuant to the
communication that will be issued by the respondent in each of the
case, the appellants may be permitted to run the retail outlets on
the basis of the temporary license.
4.Once the regular dealer is appointed on the communication
issued by the respondent, the appellants shall vacate the premises
within a period of four weeks from the date of such communication.
5.The appellants are also directed to give fresh affidavit of
undertaking before the respondents, as it was given earlier before
the learned Single Judge at the interlocutory stage within a period
of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
6.With the above directions, all these Writ Appeals are
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions
are closed.
[S.S.S.R.,J.] [D.B.C.,J.]
14.09.2023
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
NCC:Yes/No
vsn
To
The Senior Regional Manager,
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited,
Trichy Retail Regional Office,
No.90, II Floor, MSDR Enclave,
Bharathidasan Road,
Cantonment,
Trichy – 629 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.S.SUNDAR, J.
AND
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
vsn
COMMON JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.A(MD)NOs.1546 to 1556 OF 2023
and
C.M.P(MD)Nos.12079,12084,
12096,12069,12072,
12076,12065,12066,12078,
12081 and 12082 of 2023
14.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
