Sushila Devi vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 16593 P&H

                                                          Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:124954




IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH

103                                    2023:PHHC:124954
                                       CWP No.10941 of 2023
                                       Date of Decision:22.09.2023

Sushila Devi

                                                     ....Petitioner

                                       vs.

Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) and others

                                                     ....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL


Present:     Mr. Rajesh Hooda, Advocate
             for the petitioner
             Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Advocate
             for respondent No. 1
             Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate
             for respondents No. 2 and 3

               ***
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner, through instant petition under Articles 226/227

of the Constitution of India, is seeking setting aside of notice of draw of lots

dated 12.11.2017 (Annexure P/5) whereby respondent Nos.1 to 3 have

proposed to allot new Gas agency within 7 Kms from the location of the

petitioner's Gas agency. The petitioner is further seeking setting aside of

result of draw of lots held on 25.04.2023 (Annexure P/11) whereby

respondent No.4 has been declared as successful candidate.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that

respondent No.1 has allotted another Gas agency within 7 Kms from the area

of operation of the petitioner to respondent No.4. The minimum refilling

units for the feasibility of a Gas agency are 5000 and maximum ceiling is

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:124954

CWP No.10941 of 2023 -2- 2023:PHHC:124954

10,000. There is a descending trend in the turnover of the petitioner. The

petitioner during 2021 re-filled 8632 units which reduced to 6694 during

2022 and further to 6526 during 2023. The petitioner does not dispute the

location of another Gas agency on the basis of territory, however, the

grievance of the petitioner is that there is already descending trend of

turnover, thus, petitioner would not be able to survive, if another Gas agency

is established in the vicinity of the petitioner. If the second Gas agency gets

even 50% of customers of the area, neither the petitioner nor newly

established Gas agency would be able to survive. Respondent Nos.1 to 3,

ignoring their policy, have allotted another Gas agency.

3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that issue stands

settled by judgment dated 21.11.2017 of Division Bench of this Court in M/s

Ashok Indane Gas Service and Another Versus Union of India and

Others; LPA No.2212 of 2017, wherein it has been held that a dealer cannot

dictate to corporation the location of any other outlet. As per agreement

executed between the petitioner and respondent No.1, it is prerogative of

respondent to appoint any number of distributors in a particular area. No

consent of the petitioner is required. Respondent No.1- corporation has

conducted market survey prior to issuance of advertisement of second

location, thus, there is no substance in the contention of the petitioner.

4. Faced with this, counsel for the petitioner submits that

minimum refilling units for the feasibility of gas agency are 5000 and there

are all possibilities that petitioner would not be able to achieve minimum

feasible units if second agency is commenced. He further submits that

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:124954

CWP No.10941 of 2023 -3- 2023:PHHC:124954

petition may be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an

appropriate representation before the respondents if petitioner at any stage

gets less than 5000 cylinders for re-refilling.

5. In the wake of statements of both sides, the petition stands

disposed of with aforesaid liberty. The respondents shall sympathetically

consider representation of the petitioner, if so moved.

(JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 22.09.2023 paramjit

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:124954

3 of 3