Telangana High Court
M/S Sri Lakshmi Service Station, vs M/S Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., And 2 ... on 24 September, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.21916 of 2009
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:
"....to issue an order or direction or an appropriate writ more particularly a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with order of the 2nd respondent in Ref.SDO/RO/6029, dated 30.1.2009 terminating the Dealership Agreement entered with the Petitioner confirmed by the 1st respondent vide order dated 6.7.2009...."
2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.
3. The petitioner herein is a proprietary concern, dealing with the business of petroleum products under the name and style of 'Sri Lakshmi Service Station' at Bommankal, Karimnagar Bye-Pass Road, having obtained license from respondent No.1 vide letter No.SDO/R/3538, dated 21.01.2004. The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.3 vide letter, dated 27.09.2006 awarded contract to the M/s. SGS India Private Limited for supply and market 5 litres aluminium can to the terminals, supply of tests kits etc., and when respondent No.3 tried to seize the business activities and when disputes arose between the petitioner and 2 respondent No.3, it was constrained to file W.P.No.18416 of 2007 before this Court and the same was disposed of vide order, dated 03.09.2007 directing respondent No.1 therein to collect the sample and conduct marker test; in pursuance of the said order respondent No.1 collected and tested the sample resulting as 'sample failed'. It is the further case of the petitioner that in view of the observation made by respondent No.1, it has submitted a representation requesting the respondent corporation to draw more samples for testing the product once more and also requested not to terminate the contract, but respondent No.2 issued order No.SDO/RO/6029, dated 30.01.2009 terminating the dealership agreement; aggrieved by the said order, he preferred an appeal before respondent No.1 and when the same was not considered, he filed W.P.No.10931 of 2009 before this Court and the same was disposed of on 05.06.2009 directing respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal and until then not to make permanent agreement for appointment of dealer at Bomankal, Karimnagar. It is the further case of the petitioner that pursuant to the said order, respondent No.1 issued notice directing to attend the 3 personal hearing and accordingly, the proprietor has appeared and brought to the notice of respondent No.1 about the failure report, but without considering the said contention, respondent No.1 by order dated 06.07.2009 confirmed the terminating order of respondent No.2.
4. A careful examination of the order, dated 06.07.2009 passed by the appellate authority reveals that it has duly taken into consideration of the report of respondent No.3 and also followed the procedure, and therefore, the said order does not require any interference of this Court at this length of time.
5. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
__________________________________ JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY Date: 24.09.2024 sus