YOGESH KUMAR AND ORS. v. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPN. LTD. AND ORS

Citation: [1990] 3 S.C.R. 736

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: M.H. KANIA, KULDIP SINGH

Case summary

Rule 144 of the said Rules deals with the issue of a 'No Objection Certificate' for a new license for running a Petrol Pump. This order was upheld by the Commissioner, but was set aside by the High Court, on appeal.

Judgment text

YOGESH KUMAR AND ORS. v. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPN. LTD. AND ORS. ..... AUGUST 10, 1990 [M. H. KANIA AND KULDIP SINGH, JJ. ) Petroleum Rules, 1976: Rule. 151-Cancellation ofNo Objection Certificate granted under Rule 144 for running petrol pump-Interpretation ofrule-Clarification of. ~- The No Objection Certificate granted to Respondent No. 1 Corporation under Rule 144 of the Petroleum Rules 1976 for running a petrol pump set up by it on a lease hold site was cancelled by respondent No. 5, the District Magistrate under Rule 151 of the Rules. This order was upheld by the Commissioner, but was set aside by the High Court, on appeal. Hence the special leave petition against the High Court's order. Dismissing the special leave petition, this Court, HELD: The High Court was right in holding that the District Authority under Rule 151 of the Petroleum Rules, 1976 can cancel the No Objection Certificate only when the licensee ceases to have any right to use the site for storing petrol.

However, certain subsequent obser- ' ' regarding the interpretation of Rule 151 of the Rules framed in 1976 under the Petroleum Act. Rule 144 of the said Rules deals with the issue of a 'No Objection Certificate' for a new license for running a Petrol Pump. Rule 151 deals with the cancellation of the 'No Objection Certificate' and the said rule reads as follows: (1) "A no objection certificate granted under Rule 144 shall·be liable to be cancelled by the District Authority or the State Government, if the District Authority or the State Government is satisfied, that the licensee has ceased to have any right to use the site for storing petrol; Provided that before cancelling a no objection certificate, the licensee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

(2) A District Authority or a State Government cancelling a 'no objection certificate shall record in writing the reasons for such cancellation and shall immediately furnish to the licen- see and to the licensing authority concerned a copy of the order cancelling the no objection certificate. "' The High Court has rightly observed that the District Authority under Rule 151 can cancel the No Objection Certificate only when the licensee ceases to have any right to use the site for storing petrol. However, there are certain subsequent observations made by the High Court in the impugned judgment which might lead to an inference that so long as the licensee continues to have lease-hold right& on the site, the 'No Objection Certificate' cannot be cancelled at all. That does not appear to be the correct position in law. On a reading of sub"'1'Ule (1) of Rule 151 it is clear that a 'No Objection Certificate' granted under Rule 144 can be cancelled wherever the licensee ceases to h11.

ve any right to use the site for storing petrol and that right could be lost by a licensee either by his tenancy or right to the use of the site coming to an end or for any other reason whereby, in law, the right to use the site for storing petrol ceases. In view of the clarification which we have made, Dr. Singhvi, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he does not wish to press the petition. The Special Leave petition is, therefore, dismissed. N. P. V. Petition dismissed.