WP/16216/2014 of S.Naga Suryanarayana Reddy, S/o.Ramakrishna Reddy Vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd on 27 October 2025

1. S.NAGA SURYANARAYANA REDDY, S/O.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, PROPRIETOR, M/S SRI SATYA FILLING STATION, KANURU VILLAGE PERAVALI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. RESIDENT OF D.NO.23-13-1, SAJJAPURAM, TANUKU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 534 211

...PETITIONER AND

1. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD, INDIAN OIL BHAVAN, G-9 ALI YAVAR JUNG MARG BANDRA EAST, MUMBAI REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

2. THE DIRECTOR RETAIL SALES INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD, INDIAN OIL BHAVAN, G-9 ALI YAVAR JUNG MARG BANDRA EAST, MUMBAI

3. CHIEF DIVISIONAL RETAIL SALES MANAGER, INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED, MARKETING DIVISION, VISAKHA DIVISIONAL OFFICE 8TH FLOOR, LIC BUILDING, JEEVITA BHIMA ROAD VISAKHAPATNAM - 530 004

4. THE DEPUTY MANAGER RETAIL, INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED, MARKETING DIVISION, VISAKHA DIVISIONAL OFFICE 8TH FLOOR, LIC BUILDING, JEEVITA BHIMA ROAD VISAKHAPATNAM - 530 004.

...RESPONDENT(S):

JS,J W.P.No.16216 /2014

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the order of the 2nd respondent passed in appeal dt.7.7.2013 against the order of termination passed by the 3rd respondent dt.26.6.2013 as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice and pass in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to supply the petroleum products to the petitioner by suspending the proceedings of the 2nd respondent passed on 27.5.2014 in confirming the order of the 3rd respondent passed in Ref.VR.636, dt.26.6.2013, pending disposal of the WP and pass in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased direct the respondents not to remove the underground tanks and dispensing units located in the retail outlet, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. S V RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. SAI SANJAY SURANENI

2. DEEPAK BHATTACHARJEE

JS,J W.P.No.16216 /2014

The Court made the following ORDER:

Though the matter was scheduled for hearing on 28.08.2025, no counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Consequently, the case was adjourned to 10.09.2025 for “orders”. On that day, the matter was further adjourned to today’s date. When the matter was called, there was no representation for the petitioner.

2. On the other hand, Sri Pruthvi Teja, learned counsel representing Sri Sai Sanjay Suraneni, learned Standing Counsel for IOCL, submits that the site was originally designated as a B1 site; however, it has been converted into an A site. A fresh registered lease deed was executed in favour of IOCL in 2019, valid till 2049. In an A site, the land remains leased to the Corporation, with operations managed under IOCL’s control. Therefore, the nature of the lease has changed, and the outlet now functions as an A site retail outlet of IOCL.

3. In view of the same, the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication and the same is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 28.10.2025 SCH

JS,J

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM

WRIT PETITION NO: 16216/2014

Date: 28.10.2025 SCH