SAURAV RUNGTA Vs. SURAJIT KAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Three appeals along with the connected applications are taken up for hearing as they emanate out of the same writ petition.

(2.) Two appeals are at the behest of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL). Two appeals of BPCL are against the order dated October 16, 2020 and October 19, 2020. The other appeal is at the behest of a private respondent of the writ petition and is against the orders dated October 16, 2020 and October 19, 2020.

(3.) Mr. Surajit Nath Mitra, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the BPCL draws the attention of the Court to the impugned orders. He submits that, the impugned orders were passed in a writ petition, which was being heard finally by the learned Judge. He submits that, the writ petition was moved on July 24, 2020 when, BPCL raised the issue of maintainability of the writ petition. The issue of maintainability was recorded in the order dated July 24, 2020. No interim order was passed by the learned Judge taking up the writ petition. He draws the attention of the Court to the order dated August 28, 2020 passed in another writ petition being W.P. 5952 (W) of 2020 (Souradip Das vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited). He submits that, the Division Bench taking up such writ petition as Public Interest Litigation did not grant any interim order. He points out that, interim order was refused by the Division Bench on the consideration of balance of convenience and the larger interest of a petroleum outlet.