LexCOMMON CAUSE A REGD. SOCIETY versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
COMMON CAUSE A REGO. SOCIETY
v.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
NOVEMBER 4, 1996
[KULDIP SINGH AND FAIZAN UDDIN, JJ.]
A
B
Arbitrary Allotment of Petrol pumps by the then Minister-Reply to
show cause notice issued by this Court-CBI to register a case and
investigate-To complete investigation within 3 months-To file interim
report-Exemplary damages-Award of-Rs.50 lacks to be deposited by
him to the Government Exchequer within 9 months-If not paid could be C
recovered as arrears of/and revenue-Directions-Issued.
Common Cause v. UOI, (1996) 6 SCC 593, relied on.
Ni/abati Behera (Smt.) Alias La/itha Behera v. State of Orissa and D
Ors., {1993] 2 sec 746, referred to.
Rookes v. Barnard. and Ors., 1964 Appeal Cases 1129; A.B. and
Ors., v. South West Water Services Ltd., (1993) Queen's Bench 507; and
Broome v. Cassell and Co. Ltd., (1972) Appeal Cases 1027, referred to.
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (C) No. 26 of
1995.
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.)
H.D. Shourie, In-person, Prashant Bhushan and Jayant Bhushan for
the Petitioner.
H.N. Salve, P.H. Parekh, E.R. Kumar and Sarneer Parekh for Capt.
Satish Sharma.
P. Narasimhan, C.V.S. Rao, D.M. Nargolkar, Ms. H. Wahi, Ms. Neetu
Singh, Ms. S. Hazanka and Ms. Nandini Mukherjee for the
Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
373
E
F
G
H
374
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP, 8 S.C.R.
A
The question before this Court in Common Cause v, Union of India
and Ors. Writh Petition (C) No. 26/95 was whether the allotments of
retail outlets for petroleum products (Petrol Pumps) were illegal and as
such liable to the quashed. This Court by the judgment dated September
25, 1996 came to be conclusion that the allotments made by Capt. Satish
Sharma were arbitrary, discriminatory, male fidq, wholly illegal and as
B such were liable to be quashed. This Court reached the said findings on
the following reasoning:
"All the l 5 allotments-discussed above-have been made by the
Minister in a stereotyped manner. The applications have not been official
received by the Petroleum Ministry. There is no receipt-entry on any of
C the applications. The applicants seem to have approached the Minister
directly. None of the applications have been dealt with in any of the branches
of the Ministry. There is nothing on the record to indicate that the Minister
kept any criteria in view while making the allotments, How the applicants
came to know about the availability of the petrol pumps is not know. No
advertisement was made to invite the applications, There is nothing on the
D record to show that any other method of inviting applications was adopted.
There is no indication in the allotment-<>rders or any where in the record
to show that the Minister kept any guidelines in view while making these
allotments. The allotments have been made in a cloistered manner. The
petrol pumps-public property-have been doled out in a wholly arbitrary
E manner." ........................................... .
"All these allotments are wholly arbitrary, nepotistic and are motivated
by extraneous considerations." ......... ,.,, ............. ,.,, .. , .......... .
"We have no hesitation in holding that Capt. Satish Sharma in his
F capacity as a Minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas deliberately acted in
a wholly arbitrary and unjust manner. We have no doubt in our mind that
Capt. Satish. Sharma knew that the allottees were relations of his personal
staff, sons of Ministers, sons/relations of Chairman and members of the
Oil Selection Boards and the members of the Oil Selection Boards
G themselves. The allotments made by him were wholly mala fide and as
such cannot be sustained.
We are further of the view that Capt. Satish Sharma acted in a wholly
biased manner in as much as he unfairly regarded with favour the cases of
l 5 allottees before him. The relevant circumstances available from record
H and discussed by us leave to manner of doubt in our mind that Capt. Salish
COMMON CAUSE A REGO. SOCY. v. U.0.1.
375
Sharma deliberately acted in a biased manner to favour these allottees and A
as such the allotment orders are wholly vitiated and are liable to be set
aside." ................................. .
"Mr. Satish Sharma has acted in utter violation of the law laid down
by this Court and has also infracted Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
As already stated a minister in the Central Government is in a positionExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.