Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

15. From the pleadings of the parties it is clear that in some cases the oil companies had appointed MandH Contractors. In some cases MandH Contractors were appointed after proper selection but in some cases MandH Contractors have been appointed without any selection process. It is also noticed that a few MandH Contractors were existing dealers or distributors or Letter of Intent holders of the oil companies. This was contrary to the policy decision of 1999. In some cases in fact oil companies have appointed ad hoc dealers by calling the retail outlets as temporary COCO retail outlets. The ad hoc dealers were appointed without any selection process and invariably were existing dealers or distributors. This was contrary to multiple dealership norms and, therefore, they were conveniently called "temporary COCO retail outlets" and/or "ad hoc dealerships", least there is an allegation that the policy of 1999 is violated.

20. One of the contentions raised by the MandH Contractors was that they are paying license fees which a dealer is required to pay for the dealership rights. On perusal of the facts we find that no such fees was to be paid by the MandH Contractors, license fee is payable only by ad-hoc dealers. The term "ad hoc ? Dealer" is a misnomer as far as payment of license fee is concerned, as in this respect there is no difference between ad hoc dealers and permanent dealers, except, but importantly ad hoc dealers have been appointed without any selection process and contrary to multiplier dealership norms. Further, as a means of abundant clarification, we would like to mention that in case of MandH contractors, it was the oil companies who were paying them, decided sums of money to enable them to run the outlet. Thus the said contention raised by the MandH Contractors is without any merit.
27. Our attention was also drawn to the policy circular dated 8th August, 2003 issued by IOC. Relevant clauses of the said policy circular are reproduced below for reference:
Indian Oil Corporation Limited (HO Retail sales) Policy Circular No. 58-08/2K3 State Retail Heads August 8, 2003 Sub: Operation of ROs on COCO basis This is further to our letter of even No. dated 8.7.2003, on the subject vide which we had advised that in case of high potential locations, Land owner's nominee (within family) can be appointed as COCO Contractor, without going through selection process, provided he is found capable of running the RO effectively.