M.N. Bhandari, J. - (1.) SINCE all these writ petitions involve common question of facts and law, thus, they have been heard together and are being decided by this judgment.
(2.) THE respondent -Indian Oil Corporation issued an advertisement dated 22.09.2002 to invite applications for long term lease/outright purchase to establish new petrol pumps. The petitioners made an application for long term lease. A lease agreement was then executed followed by a contract/agreement for maintenance and haulage. In pursuance of the aforesaid contract, the respondent -Corporation established a retail outlet and allowed the petitioners to maintain and operate it. The respondents then changed their policy on 06.09.2006, where a decision was taken to give retail outlet dealership of the petrol pumps run on the pattern of Company Owned -Company Operated (for short, 'the COCO'). The petitioners are aggrieved by the said policy and prayed for grant of retail outlet dealership in their favour. It is submitted that when the advertisement was issued followed by lease agreement, an understanding was made between the parties for grant of retail outlet dealership in favour of the landholders. Even letters were exchanged for the aforesaid purposes and finally the petitioners were allowed to operate petrol pumps under the agreement for maintenance and haulage. In view of the above, the petitioners are operating the petrol pumps for last many years, but with a change of policy, the intention of the IOC is to give retail outlet dealership to others and that too on the land belonging to the petitioners. If at all, the respondents intent to allot retail outlet instead of running it as COCO, a priority should be given to the petitioners as they are not only operating the petrol pumps for last many years, but have gained experience also. Thus, no fruitful purpose will remain to induct a new person. In the background aforesaid, the policy dated 06.09.2006 deserves to be struck down.
(3.) IT is further submitted that not only the lease agreement but the contract for maintenance and haulage is on certain terms and conditions. The petitioners cannot be precluded to terminate the lease agreement or to seek rights arising out of contract for maintenance and haulage. In case of termination of lease, establishment of a retail outlet run as COCO would not continue. It would be detrimental to the interests of both the parties. Taking into consideration the overall facts, this Court should command the respondents with direction to allot retail outlet dealership in favour of the petitioners.;