Telangana High Court
WP/28919/2008 of Madhu Filling Staion, HPCL Dealer, Vs The Joint Collector (Civil Supplies Wing) on 30 December 2008
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 28919 of 2008 Between: Madhu Filling Staion, HPCL Dealer, Lakshmipuram Village,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULUWRIT PETITION NO : 28919 of 2008
Between:
Madhu Filling Staion, HPCL Dealer, Lakshmipuram Village,Kruthivennu Mandal, Krishna District rep. by its Licensee: R.Madhu Babu.
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 The Joint Collector (Civil Supplies Wing) Krishna District.
2 The Senior Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Regional Office, Kattubadipalem, Kondapally, Vijayawada, Krishna District.
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that inthe circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will bepleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, orderor direction, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in suspendint thesales of HSD and MS in the outlet of the petitioner by putting seals to theunder ground tanks of the outlet on 02.12.2008 as illegal, arbitrary andwithout jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents to shift theseized stock from the under ground tanks to another place so as to enablethe petitioner to carry on its regular business.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.DEVANAND
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES
The Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU
W.P. No. 28919 of 2008
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R:
This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaringthe action of 2[nd] respondent in suspending the sales of HSD and MS inthe outlet of the petitioner, by putting seals to the underground tanks ofoutlet on 2.12.2008, as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction;consequently, to direct the respondents to shift the seized stock from theunderground tanks to another place so as to enable the petitioner to carryon its regular business.
It appears, the petitioner is engaged in the business ofpurchase, sale and storage of high-speed diesel oil and motor spirit atLakshmipuram Village, Kruthivennu Mandal, Krishna District, under alicence issued under the A.P. Petroleum Products (Licencing andRegularisation of Supplies) Order, 1980. The licence held by thepetitioner is further valid up to 31.12.2010. While that being so, on2.12.2008, the Sales Officer of 2[nd] respondent surprised the businesspremises of the petitioner and lifted samples of MS and HSD for thepurpose of sending to an analyst. Now the grievance of the petitioner isthat the sales and supply of HSD and MS oil have been suspended tillfurther advise, without issuing any notice, which is against the principlesof natural justice.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that therespondents ought not to have passed the impugned order suspendingthe sales and supply of HSD and MS oil without issuing any notice.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submittedthat the report of the analyst has already been received and the samplesare found to be adulterated. Therefore, the petitioner will be issued with ashow-cause notice and further action will be taken according to law.Under these circumstances, any interim order by this Court wouldprejudice the interest of the 2[nd] respondent – Organization.
From the above, it is clear that according to the respondentsthe samples taken were already sent to analyst and the analyst report discloses that they were adulterated. Therefore, I am of the opinion that itmay not be desirable to suspend the order passed by the respondentssuspending the sales of HSD and MS in the outlet of the petitioner.However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents aredirected to complete the enquiry contemplated against the petitionerwithin a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of thisorder.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.
C.V. RAMULU, J.
Date: 30-12-2008.
Note:
C.C. in three days.
Conclusion
(BO)MVB.MVB.