Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6.2. At this juncture, it may also be important to advert to the fact that after MDG 2012 was amended on 02.10.2017, the OMCs appear to have issued a Standard Operating Procedure (in short "SOP) to put in place a protocol for measure-check of nozzles at R.O.s. Clause 14 and 15 of this SOP being relevant are extracted hereafter.

"14. If two consecutive variations are beyond +/- 10 ml, action to be initiated as per MDG against [the] short delivery of [the] product.
15. Variation of +/- 25 ml being the maximum permissible error as per Legal Metrology Act and 10 ml being the least count in the LCD display of DU, if variation in two consecutive measure checks are [is] beyond +/- 10 ml, action to be initiated as per MDG against short delivery of product."

7. As would be evident, the OMCs have brought down the variation level below the maximum permissible limit as fixed under the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 [in short "LM Act"] and have provided for action for short delivery under the amended MDG, if two consecutive variations are beyond - 10 millilitres.

7.1. In this behalf, reliance is also placed on the notification dated 12.03.2010 issued by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs and Public Distribution and the amended provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures (General) Rules, 1987 which are indicative of the fact that the maximum permissible error for a 5 litre quantity of petrol or diesel delivered by Dispensing Units (in short "DUs") is 25 millilitre. 7.2. The amendments made to the 2012 MDG, thus, led to unrest among various R.O. dealers spread across the country. Consequently, a call for strike was given by R.O. dealers on 07.10.2017. As a matter of fact, the strike was observed by R.O. dealers on 13.10.2017. It is averred by the R.O. dealers that, in the interregnum, OMCs, initially, began with stopping supplies of petroleum products to only those R.O.s which were owned by office bearers of various associations.

(viii)(a) Insofar as the amendment to Clause 5.12 of MDG 2012 was concerned, it was stated that prior to the amendment, the obligation of the R.O. dealers was only to carry out checks in terms of Clause 1.4.2 (a) and

(d). In case, it was noticed that there was short delivery of the product by the DUs despite seals being intact, the R.O. dealer was required to suspend the sales till recalibration was done. However, after the amendment, the R.O. dealer is required to suspend the sales and recalibrate the DU even when it is found that the error is within the permissible limits. What constitutes permissible limit is not that which is provided under the LM Act instead is one which is contained in the amended MDG 2012. Thus, the OMCs in providing a higher bar qua permissible error (which is contrary to the statutory provision), has lost sight of the fact that DUs are mechanical devices that do not ensure 100% accuracy.

Clause 5.1.2 Short delivery of products: -

(B) The argument advanced on behalf of the petitioners and intervenors tends to misinterpret the provisions of the LM Act. While the LM Act makes a provision for maximum permissible error in the sale and supply of petroleum products, there is no bar in prescribing a higher standard for sale and supply of petroleum products by reducing the margin of error. In this context, even where the DU delivers an excess amount of petroleum product, say by 10 millilitres, it will be recalibrated to ensure that there is no loss to the R.O. dealer. Thus, prescribing higher standards would not lead to a violation of the LM Act. The fixing of higher standards via amended MDG 2012 ensures the minimization of loss to customers as well as the R.O. dealers.