LAWS(DLH)-2002-4-21

ABDUL RAHMAN Vs. CENTRAL FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

Decided On April 05, 2002
ABDUL RAHMNAN Appellant
V/S
CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . By this petition under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC the petitioner seeks a review of the order, dated 3/12/1999, whereby the LPG distributorship allotted to him under the discretionary quota of the Minister for Petroleum was cancelled on the ground that the discretion exercised in his favour was not proper as no verification was carried out before the order of allotment was made.

(2.) . The appreciate the controversy, it would be necessary to briefly refer to the background facts. A public interest petition was filed in the Supreme Court by Centre for Public Interest Litigation under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying for laying down guidelines to regulate exercise of discretion in the matter of allotments of petroleum and LPG dealerships under the discretionary quota. The Apex Court laid down the norms/guidelines for making such allotments. The said decision is since reported as Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India and Ors. (1995 Supp. (3) SCC 382). Yet another petition was filed by the Common Cause in the Supreme Court, praying for cancellation of 15 allotments made by the Minister, inter alia, on the ground that the allotments had been made malafide and the decision of the Minister was arbitrary and motivated by extraneous considerations. During the pendency of the second petition before the Apex Court, writ petitions, being CWP No 4003 and 4430/95 were filed in this Court by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation, challenging the allotments of petrol pumps/gas agencies etc., to various persons during the periods 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96. However, on a transfer petition being filed in the Supreme Court, further proceedings in the said writ petitions were stayed.

(3.) . Ultimately the Supreme Court cancelled all the allotments made in favour of 15 persons, mentioned in another petition, holding that the allotments were arbitrary, discriminatory, mala fide and wholly illegal. while disposing of the said petition, the Supreme Court not only vacated the order staying the proceedings in this Court, it also directed this Court to go into the validity of each of the allotments of retail outlets for petrol pumps/gas agencies to various persons, after hearing them in accordance with law. (See: Common Cause, A Registered Society v. Union of India and Others 1996 (6) SCC 530.