ANIL CHANDRA SARKAR Vs. DIST. MAGISTRATE, JALPAIGURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for writ of mandamous or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents not to curtail quota of kerosene supply to petitioner as fixed by the Sub-Divisional Controller, Food and Supply, Alipurduar and the District Controller, Food and Supply, Jalpaiguri from time to time.

(2.) Case of the petitioner in short is that he is the proprietor of M/s. Kiran Agency. Pursuant to an agreement dated 1.3.1984 between the petitioner and respondent No. 5 being the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., petitioner was appointed as kerosene dealer for Alipurduar. After the petitioner was so appointed as dealer of kerosene for Alipurduar, he applied before appropriate authority for granting him licence under the provisions of West Bengal Kerosene Control Order, 1968 so that he may carry on his business as kerosene agent of the said oil distributing company i.e., Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. para 3(a) of the said order defines "Agent" to mean a person who is appointed as an agent of Oil Distributing Company by such Company and has been granted a licence under para 5 thereof to carry on business of kerosene agency. Soon thereafter the Director of the consumer goods, Govt. of West Bengal granted necessary licence in favour of the petitioner under para 5 of the said order to carry on business of kerosene agent within the meaning of para 3 thereof. Said licence was renewed from time to time. Be there as it may, said licence is valid up to 31.3.2001 due to renewal granted from time to time. Various terms and conditions as stipulated in the said licence are quoted hereunder:-

(3.) On perusal of the terms and conditions as stipulated in the said license and the agreement it appears to me that no one fixed quota of kerosene supply to the petitioner. In fact in paragraph 9 of the writ petition it was specifically pleaded by the petitioner that "the Indian Oil Corporation did not fix any quota and that it is regularly supplying kerosene sometimes more than 150 kls., some- times less than 250 kls ......." Further case of the petitioner, as pleaded in para graph 10 and elsewhere of the writ petition, is that "in view of practice and procedure" Indain Oil Corporation supplied petitioner with kerosene as per direction issued by the Director of Consumer Goods or the quota fixed by the Sub-Divisional Controller, Food and Supply.