Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Thriprayar Gas Energy vs The Chief Controller Of Explosives on 17 October, 2017

Author: Dama Seshadri Naidu

Bench: Antony Dominic, Dama Seshadri Naidu

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                    PRESENT:

       THE HONOURABLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
                                        &
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

    TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/16TH KARTHIKA, 1939

                             WA.No. 2173 of 2017
                             IN WP(C).22612/2017
                   --------------------------------------------
  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 22612/2017 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA
                               DATED 17-10-2017
                                      -------

    APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
    ----------------------------

            THRIPRAYAR GAS ENERGY,
    REP. BY MANAGING PARTNER, K.K. BHASKARAN,
    EAST TIPPU SULTAN ROAD, NATTIKA VILLAGE,
    THRISSUR DISTRICT. PIN 680567.




            BY ADV. SRI.M.K.DILEEP KUMAR

    RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
    -----------------------------------

1.  THE CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES,
    PETRTOLEUM AND EXPLOSIVES SAFETY ORGANIZATION,
    A-BLOCK, CGO COMPLEX, 5TH FLOOR,
    SEMINARY HILLS, NAGPUR,
    MAHARASHTRA STATE, PIN 440 006.


2.  SHV ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED,
    SUPER GAS HOUSE, 4TH FLOOR,
    SDE SERENE CHAMBERS,
    ROAD NO.7, BANJARA HILLS,
    HYDERABAD,
    TELENGANA STATE PIN 500034.

3.  THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR,
    COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE POST,
    THRISSUR DISTRICT PIN 680 003.




            BY SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
            BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.TEK CHAND

      THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
  07-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:



                  ANTONY DOMINIC Ag. C.J.,
                                &
                  DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
          ------------------------------------------------
                     W. A. No.2173 of 2017
          ------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 7th day of November, 2017

                           JUDGMENT

Antony Dominic, Ag. C.J.

1. aAggrieved by Ext.P3, W.P.(C) No.22612 of 2017 was filed by the appellant. The writ petition having been dismissed, this appeal is filed.

2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant, Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the first respondent and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the third respondent.

3. Facts of the case are that, the appellant was carrying on marketing of LPG as a franchisee of M/s Auto Gas Energy India Ltd. M/s Auto Gas Energy India Ltd. applied and obtained NOC from District Collector and also licence under the Static and Mobile Pressure Vessels (Unfired) Rules, 1981, from the Controller of Explosives. Accordingly, NOC and licence was obtained and it was on that basis, the appellant was carrying on W. A. No.2173 of 2017 -2- the business. The Franchisee Agreement was subsequently terminated and the appellant is presently appointed as a franchisee of the second respondent. It appears that, thereupon, the appellant sought renewal of the NOC and licence issued by the District Collector and Controller of Explosives. That request of the appellant was rejected by Ext.P3 on the ground that NOC and licence having been issued on the application of the Auto Gas Energy India Ltd., renewal thereof can be granted only if application is made by the grantee and not by anybody else. It is this order which was challenged and which challenge was repelled by the learned single Judge.

4. Although, the learned counsel for the appellant wanted us to consider NOC and licence granted to the appellant in respect of the premises in relation to which he was conducting business of his erstwhile principal, admittedly, the NOC and licence were granted on the application of his erstwhile principal. Therefore, the renewal of such licence or NOC can be only on the basis of application made by the applicant, at whose instance the NOC and licence were issued. Appellant does not have a case that W. A. No.2173 of 2017 -3- M/s Auto Gas Energy India Ltd. has applied for such renewal.

5. In such a situation, we cannot find fault with the view taken in Ext.P3 or the view taken by the learned single Judge that the renewal could not have been sought by the appellant.

6. We do not find any reason to interfere with the judgment under appeal. Needless to say that the observations in this judgment will not stand in the way of the appellant or its present principal in making application for the NOC and licence, as the case may be.

Appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

ANTONY DOMINIC ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE kns/-

//TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE W. A. No.2173 of 2017 -4-