Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. According to the petitioners, the distribution of Kerosene (SKO) has been reduced by the Government of India since 2001-02, taking into account the number of LPG connections released in each State. SKO Dealerships of the petitioners have become unviable over the period due to reduced supply of SKO by the Oil Corporations. The Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, has decided as a policy to formulate a scheme to allow SKO dealers to switchover to LPG distribution and entrusted the responsibility to work out the modalities to implement its policy to the Oil Marketing Companies. Consequently, specific eligibility cretiria is prescribed by the Oil Marketing Companies for permitting existing SKO dealers to apply for LPG distributorship so as to implement the policy to allow SKO dealers to switch over to LPG distributorship. The Government of India as well as Government of Tamil Nadu have been concentrating on the supply of LPG only, which resulted in reduction of allotment of kerosene. The policy of the Government of Tamil Nadu is that whoever holding two LPG cylinders, is not entitled to get kerosene from the Public Distribution System and whoever holding one LPG cylinder, is entitled to get only 3 liters of kerosene per month. On the other hand, the allotment of LPG to the existing LPG dealers is getting increased day by day and they are not able to supply LPG to the public effectively. Since kerosene business has become very sick, the petitioners have incurred huge loss by supplying the Kerosene product of the Oil Corporations. The Oil Corporations have to rehabilitate the petitioners, otherwise right to livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution will be affected. However, the Government of Tamil Nadu and Union of India have been taking earnest steps to allot LPG distributorship to SKO/LDO (Kersone dealers). While so, the respective Oil Corporations have also issued advertisement in Hindu Newspaper on 15.6.2010 to fill up all the locations in Tamil Nadu, so that they can say that all the locations are filled up. Challenging the same, a batch of writ petitions in W.P.Nos.22503 of 2010, 16517 to 16519 of 2010 were filed before this Court. While disposing the said writ petitions, this Court, on 23.8.2011, has passed the order, of which, para 9 to 12 are relevant and they are extracted hereunder:

4. Writ Petition in W.P.No.3121 of 2015 has been filed by the petitioners, who are also wholesale superior Kerosene Dealer (SKO), praying to quash the Clause 9 of the Brochure on guidelines for selection of regular LPG Distributors (April 2014) and consequently allot LPG distributorship to the petitioners qualified under Clause 6.2.3.

5. According to the above said petitioners, in the year 2010, the Government of India revised LPG Policy enforcing gradual reduction of kerosene usage and encouraging LPG cylinders usage for general public and thus various methods were envisaged, resulting in the usage if kerosene throughout the country was drastically reduced and thereby, the livelihood of the SKOs, who are 427 in number including the petitioners, is put to stake by the policy of the Government and hence, they made representations to convert them as LPG distributors. While so, a batch of writ petitions were filed before this Court challenging the advertisements issued by the various Oil Corporations in respect of allotment of LPG distributorship. While disposing of the said writ petitions, this Court directed the Government of India, to take decision of the proposal for conversion of SKO dealership to LPG distributorship on account of reduction in PDS/SKO quota. Subsequently, the Oil Corporations amended brochure on guidelines for selection of LPG distributors and inserted Clause 6.2.3, which provided specific eligibility criteria for existing SKO companies. The grievance of the petitioners is that by virtue of the above said Clause, no specific right was given in favour of the petitioners, but only certain concession was given to fit in to the eligibility criteria of selection and there was no provision, enabling the petitioners to get the allotment of LPG dealership. It is also stated that Clause 6.2.3 is not benefiting the petitioners and the selection process as per the norms, would lead to a situation of elimination of the successful applicants since ultimate selection is done only by drawal of lot under Clause 9 of the brochure. In other words, though the SKO dealers were found eligible, however, they wold be eliminated through the lot system and therefore, the procedure for selection in respect of SKO dealers is unjust and illegal. Hence, the petitioners have come forward with the above writ petition.

9.15. Field Verification of Credentials (FVC) of selected candidate will be undertaken only after DD of Rs. 50000/- or Rs. 25000/- as applicable is deposited with the concerned office of OMC. The candidature of the selected candidate will be cancelled in case he/she fails to deposit the said amount.

10. It is pertinent to note that under Clause 6.2.3(a), a pre-condition was fixed for the existing SKO dealers that if the average allocation of less than 75 KL per month, only those SKO dealers are eligible to apply for LPG Distributorship. In this regard, the learned counsel submit that whenever LPG distributors have business below 60% of the total number of cylinders allocated per month, such distributorships are treated as unviable by the Oil Corporations and in such cases, they allocate additional cylinders to make the distributors viable by transferring additional cylinders from other distributors who handle over and above their allocation/handling capacity. Average allocation of 75 KL of SKO per month in effect works out only 30% of the total 250 KL of SKO per month allocated to each SKO Dealers. He would further submit that doing business not below 60% of the handling capacity is taken as the viable limit for LPG Distributorship, whereas in the case of SKO Dealers, same Oil Marketing Companies would apply different yardstick by taking allocation of below 75 KL [30% of the monthly Quota] out of 250 KL/month which is construed as unviable. There is a disparity in the yardstick adopted for construing a LPG Distributorship and SKO dealership as unviable. Any existing SKO dealer would become eligible to get LPG distributorship by surrendering SKO dealership provided he is in a position to fulfill required infrastructure and financial capability prescribed for awarding LPG distributorship. In such circumstances, prescription of additional condition that SKO dealer applying for LPG distributorship shall not have average allocation of SKO per month more than 75 KL has no nexus to the conversion of SKO Dealers as LPG distributor. Thus the learned counsel would contend that it is arbitrary to say that only such SKO Dealers who are getting average allocation of SKO below 30% of their monthly quota alone will be eligible to apply for LPG Distributorship and that the Clause 6.2.3 (a) prescribing that SKO dealers operating as sole proprietor and having average allocation of less that 75 KL of SKO/month in the preceding year alone are eligible to apply for LPG Distributorship is wholly irrelevant for the rehabilitation of existing SKO dealers who are willing and otherwise ready to fulfill the essential criteria in regard to infrastructure and financial capability prescribed for awarding LPG Distributorship.

25. The above said judgments, in my opinion, are squarely applicable to the present case also. I do not find any valid reason to take a different view. On account of increase of usage of LPG, the use of kerosene has come down drastically which affects livelihood of the the SKO dealers, who are entirely dependent on this avocation for several years and they are on the verge of loosing their main source of earnings. In fact, taking into account of this as well as the directions of this Court, the Oil Corporations have prescribed certain criteria facilitating SKO dealers to participate and get LPG distributorship. However, it appears that being not satisfied with the said criteria, the petitioners/SKO dealers have come up with the present writ petitions, demanding automatic conversion into LPG Dealership, which in my opinion, is not feasible. The principle of law is well settled and needs no reiteration that no person can insist a special concession or percentage of reservation in favour of a particular class of people or category of persons as a matter of right. Concession or reservation is an enabling provision and it is exclusive domain of the Oil Corporations to provide concession or reservation to various social groups and to prescribe the percentage of reservation in favour of various social groups. Thus, petitioners cannot as a matter of right insists that there should be automatic conversion by switching over to LPG distributorship and they should not be clubbed with any category of persons in the process of selection of LPG dealerships. In fact, the Oil Corporations have given sufficient justification by making provision, enabling the SKO dealers to switch to LPG distributorship, subject to fulfillment of the prescribed criteria and they have to compete with the other groups in open competition for securing LPG distributorship. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners. Though the learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon numbers judgments delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in support of their contentions, I find that all those judgments were delivered on different factual aspects and not in respect of commercial transactions; hence, they are not applicable to the present facts of the case.