- (1.) WE have heard Sri Bhairo Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri B.B.Paul and Sri Vikas Budhwar, learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) THE petitioner no.2 is having a LPG distributorship of Bharat Petroleum Limited at Mauaima, district Allahabad. The petitioner was selected and appointed as distributor in pursuance of an advertisement issued by the respondent -company on 21 -09 -2000 under Reserved for Women and Scheduled Caste category. After issuance of letter of intent and developing the required facilities and infrastructure an agreement dated 26 -11 -2001 was executed between the parties. The petitioner's retail outlet dealership became functional on 26 -11 -2001 and the area of operation was within 15 kms. radius of Mauaima. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned notice dated 26 -06 -2012 and 11 -07 -2012 and a mandamus to direct the respondent to continue the supply of the petitioner without any harassment. A further prayer of mandamus has been sought to command the respondents to consider the reply of the petitioner dated 11 -07 -2012 and the representation dated 08 -08 -2012 before making any recovery and to restore the agency of the petitioner immediately.
(3.) BY way of amendment, subsequently the following reliefs were added : 1) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 10.1.2013 passed by the Territory Manager advising to deposit Rs.9,87,500/ - towards cost of equipments and shortage of cylinders. 2) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to forthwith restore consumer of petitioner gas agency and corresponding number of gas cylinders attached to other gas agency. The facts as cull out from the pleadings of the parties are that in pursuance of the decision dated 8/9 -08 -2002 taken by the Union of India terminating various agencies through out the country, the distributorship of the petitioner was also cancelled by the respondent no. 3 on 04 -08 -2002. The order was challenged before this Court by filing writ petition which was disposed of in pursuance of the judgment and order dated 20 -12 -2002 passed by the Apex Court in Transferred Case (Civil) No. 80 of 2002 (Onkar Lal Bajaj etc. v. Union of India). The Apex Court had made following directions : "For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned order dated 9th August, 2002 is hereby quashed except in respect of cases referred to the Committee. The cases referred to the Committee would be considered on receipt of the report. However, the interim order dated 28th August, 2002 would continue to apply to these referred cases till further orders. The said order is further extended to cases where select panel has been published but letters of intent have not been issued. Transferred Case Nos. 80, 81 to 88, 90 and 91/2002, all intervention application therein, I.A. Nos. 2556 in Transfer Petition (C) Nos. 417 -423/2002 and Contempt Petition (C) No. 556/2002 in Transferred Petition (C) No.417 -423/2002 are disposed of in terms of this decision. A copy of the judgment shall be sent to the Registrar Generals of all the High Courts so that the writ petitions, if any, pending in the High Courts on similar questions can be disposed of in terms of this judgment.";