PETROLEUM CORPORATION Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties on the two interlocutory applications, one filed by the petitioners and another filed by the respondent No. 2. I.A. No. 1847 of 2010 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking permission to introduce certain amendments in the original writ application. A rejoinder to the interlocutory application has been filed by the respondents.

(2.) learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ application has been filed for the following relief(s).

(3.) learned Counsel explains that this Court while admitting the writ application, had, vide its order dated 19.3.2009, passed an interim order directing the parties to maintain status quo till the disposal of the writ application. Yet, the respondent No. 3 by by his order dated 17.3.2010, has intimated to the petitioner that the dealership agreement which the petitioner had entered into with the respondents, has been terminated with immediate effect and the petitioner has also been asked to depute his representative to be present at the retail outlet site for the purpose of enabling the respondents to take away the articles from the site.