SPA/920/2017
2025 Latest Caselaw 2892 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

SPA/920/2017 on 11 June, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

                                                                2025:UHC:4846-DB
              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions               COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
                               SPA/920/2017
                               Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Hon'ble Subhash Upadhyay, J.

1. None present for the appellant.

2. Mr. Hemant Dangwal, Advocate holding brief of Mr. P.K. Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. On the last occasion, appellant was not represented and this Court passed an order that in case, on the next date also, he remains unrepresented, then the Special Appeal shall be decided, even in the absence of the appellant.

4. In such view of the matter, we have heard learned counsel for the respondent and perused the record.

5. There is delay of 36 days in filing the appeal. For the reasons stated in the delay condonation application, the same (IA No. 14329 of 2017) is allowed. The delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.

6. This intra-court appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 23.08.2017 rendered by learned Single Judge in WPMS No. 2677 of 2013. By the said judgment, writ petition filed by the appellant, challenging a show cause notice, was disposed of with a direction to the Competent Authority in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. to take decision in the matter, within six weeks. It was further provided that till decision is taken supply of petroleum products to the petitioner shall not be disturbed.

2025:UHC:4846-DB

7. We do not find any scope of interference in the matter. The writ petition filed by appellant was premature, as he challenged a show cause notice.

8. Learned Single Judge directed the Competent Authority to consider appellant's reply to the show cause notice, within six weeks and it was further provided that supply of petroleum products to the appellant shall not be disturbed, during the interregnum.

9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, learned Single Judge was justified in disposing of the writ petition with direction to the Competent Authority to take final decision in the matter, after considering appellant's reply to show cause notice.

10. Thus, there is no scope of interference with the impugned judgment. Accordingly, the special appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.

(Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 11.06.2025

Aswal

NITI RAJ DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f98 02a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001,

SINGH ASWAL st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5 C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.06.12 01:12:41 -07'00' 2025:UHC:4846-DB