125x Filetype PDF File size 0.80 MB Source: www.livelaw.in
WWW.LIVELAW.IN $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on: 24th November, 2021 Pronounced on: 10th January, 2022 + LPA 24/2021& CM APPL. 1843/2021(stay) INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General with Mr. Parijat Sinha, Mr. Rudra Dutta, Mrs. Sanyukta Gupta and Mr. Akhil Tewatia, Advocates Versus ALL INDIA PETROLEUM DEALERS ASSOCIATION REGISTERED AND OTHERS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. S. B. Upadhyay, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajesh Mahale, Advocate for Respondents No.1 and 2. Mr.Ripudaman Bhardwaj, Central Government Standing Counsel with Mr.Kushagra Kumar, Advocate for Respondent No.3. Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Senior Advocate with Mr. G. Sivabala Murgan, Advocate for Intervener. Dr.Pabitra Pal Chowdhury and Mr. Kumar Utkarsh, Advocates for Intervener, i.e. North Bengal Petroleum Dealers Association. + LPA 30/2021& CM APPL. 2389/2021 (stay) INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General with Mr. Parijat Sinha, Mr. Rudra Dutta, LPA 24/2021 & connected matters Page 1 of 82 WWW.LIVELAW.IN Mrs. Sanyukta Gupta and Mr. Akhil Tewatia, Advocates Versus ALL HARYANA PETROLEUM DEALERS ASSOCIATION REGISTERED AND OTHERS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ripudaman Bhardwaj, Central Government Standing Counsel with Mr.Kushagra Kumar, Advocates for Respondent No.3. + LPA 31/2021& CM APPL. 2392/2021 & 12432/2021 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General with Mr. Parijat Sinha, Mr. Rudra Dutta, Mrs. Sanyukta Gupta and Mr. Akhil Tewatia, Advocates Versus BIHAR PETROLEUM DEALERS ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anuj Aggarwal and Mr.Kumar Utkarsh, Advocates for Respondent No.1. Mr. Ripudaman Bhardwaj, Central Government Standing Counsel with Mr.Kushagra Kumar, Advocates for Respondent No.3. Mr. Narender Hooda, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shanth Kumar V. Mahale, Advocate for Interveners. CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH LPA 24/2021 & connected matters Page 2 of 82 WWW.LIVELAW.IN TABLE OF CONTENTS S. NO. CONTENTS PARA I. SUMMARIUM 1 II. FACTUAL MATRIX 2 III. ARGUMENTS CANVASSED BY LEARNED SOLICITOR GENERAL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE 11 APPELLANTS IN ALL THE THREE LETTERS PATENT APPEALS IV. ARGUMENTS CANVASSED ON BEHALF OF 25 RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2 (ORIGINAL PETITIONERS) IN ALL THE THREE APPEALS V. ARGUMENTS CANVASSED BY THE INTERVENORS 32 VI. REASONS AND ANALYSIS 37 VI A. CLAUSE 43 OF THE DEALERSHIP AGREEMENT 38 VI B. CLAUSE 1.5 –OBSERVANCE OF STATUTORY AND 52 OTHER REGULATIONS VI C. CLAUSE 5.1.2–SHORT DELIVERY OF PRODUCTS 61 VI D. CLAUSE 5.1.18–PAYMENT OF WAGES 67 VI E. CLAUSE 8.3 – MAJOR IRREGULARITIES 71 VI F. CLAUSE 5.1.14(b) – NON-PROVISION OF CLEAN 83 TOILET FACILITY VII. CONCLUSION 86 LPA 24/2021 & connected matters Page 3 of 82 WWW.LIVELAW.IN JUDGMENT : Per D. N. PATEL, Chief Justice I. SUMMARIUM 1. Being aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied by the common judgment and order of the learned Single Judge passed in W.P.(C) No.10334/2017, W.P.(C) No.10746/2017 and W.P.(C) No.11246/2017 dated 18.03.2020, Appellants have preferred the present Letters Patent Appeals. Appellants, herein, were Respondents No.2 to 4 respectively, in the writ Petitions. For the sake of convenience, parties are being referred to hereinafter, by their litigating status before this Court. The prime ground for challenge in the present Appeals, inter alia, is that by the impugned judgement, the affect of Amendment, notified in the year 2017, amending the Marketing Discipline Guidelines, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “MDGs” for the sake of brevity), has been invalidated and nullified. II. FACTUAL MATRIX 2. Appellants herein, being Oil Marketing Companies (hereinafter referred to as “OMCs”), in the year 1981-82, for the first time, formulated and issued the MDGs, for maintaining market discipline and uniformity in action for operating the network of Petrol and Diesel Retail Outlets (hereinafter referred to as “ROs”) under the OMCs. 3. The MDGs were reviewed and amended from time to time, in view of changing circumstances as well as to set high customer service benchmarks for the OMCs as also the Dealers’ network. 4. The MDGs were reviewed and amended again in the year 2012 and MDG-2012 were issued and made effective from 08.01.2013. LPA 24/2021 & connected matters Page 4 of 82
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.