JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) THESE two appeals are directed against a common judgment dated 16th April, 2004, passed by the learned Single Judge on two writ applications, which had been filed by the two appellants
before us. The appellant in L.P.A. No. 417/2004 is the Jharkhand Kerosene Dealers '
Association, whereas in the other appeal, being L.P.A. No. 416/2004, the appellant is the. All India
Kerosene Oil Dealers ' Federation. In both the writ applications, the subject -matter of
challenge was the order dated 22nd December, 2003, passed by the State Government in respect
of commission to be paid to Kerosene Oil Wholesale Dealers in the different districts within the
State. In order to appreciate the order, which was passed, one will have to consider the factual
background which has been set out by the learned Single Judge in his impugned order.
(2.) IT will appear that the Government of India in its Petroleum and Chemicals Ministry had appointed a Committee to examine and report in the matter of determination of the ex -refinery
process of refined petroleum products. The said Committee fixed the commission at Rs. 7.70 on the
sale of Kerosene, when the price of one Kilo -litre was Rs. 358.80. While fixing the said rate, the
Committee had taken note of the fact that in the year 1965 the commission to the Agents was
being paid at the rate of 2.15% of the value of Kerosene Oil per Kilo -litre sold. The writ petitioners
wrote to the Ministry of Petroleum requesting fixation of Agents ' commission at the rate of
2.15% of the total value per Kilo -litre and also other allowances at the rate of 1% leakage on the cost value, barrel depreciation handling and other expenses. Thereafter, the writ petitioners in
CWJC No. 1471/2001 filed a writ petition, before the Patna High Court being CWJC No.
11057/1996, which, according to the appellants, was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to fix the rate of commission @ 2.15% per barrel of Kerosene Oil. Subsequently, the
petitioner -Federation filed a petition for modification of the said order dated 13th May, 1998, on the
further submission that the competent authority for fixing such commission was the Union Of India
in its Ministry of Petroleum. On such submission, the earlier order dated 13th May, 1998, was
modified by the order dated 13th October, 1998, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the
Union Of India for redressal of its grievances. It appears that the petitioners thereafter made a
representation to the Commissioner -cum -Secretary, Food Supply & Commerce Department,
Government, of Bihar, requesting that the commission @ 2.15% be given to those whole -sale
dealers, who are the members of the petitioner -Federation. The Deputy Secretary to the
Government of Bihar, Food, Civil Supply and Commerce Department, vide Circular dated 10th
August, 1999, addressed to the District Magistrates of three districts, namely, Rohtas, Bhojpur and
Bokaro, directed them to take a proper decision in the light of the judgment and order dated 13th
May, 1998 passed by the Patna High Court. Thereafter, according to the appellants, the District
Magistrates/Deputy Commissioners in the States of Bihar and Jharkhand had allowed 2.15%
commission plus leakage and other expenditures to the wholesale kerosene dealers of the
respective districts. Subsequent thereto, the Commissioner -cum -Secretary, Food, Civil Supply and
Commerce Department, Government of Jharkhand, issued a letter dated 29th December, 2003,
addressed to all the Deputy Commissioners, Jharkhand, informing them that the Ministry of
Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India, is the competent authority to fix the rate of
commission and not the Deputy Commissioner; therefore, the payment of 2.15% commission to the
members of the Dealers ' Association was illegal and was to be stopped forthwith. As
indicated hereinabove, it is the said order, which was the subject -matter of challenge in the two
writ applications, which were filed on behalf of the said two writ petitioners.
The learned Single Judge, while considering the two writ applications, appears to have been convinced that the orders were passed by the district -authorities of the State of Jharkhand on a
misrepresentation of the order passed by the Patna High Court to the effect that the High Court
had itself directed that the rate of commission be fixed @ 2.15% per Kilo -litre, which, in fact, was
not the case. The learned Single Judge also took note of the fact that taking advantage of the
said orders, the members of the petitioner - Association and Federation had gained illegal
advantage by receiving commission, and, accordingly, while dismissing the writ applications,
directed that the Deputy Commissioners of the concerned districts would be entitled to take action
against the said dealers for recovery of the amounts, which, according to the learned Single
Judge, had been illegally collected by them.
(3.) APPEARING in support of the first of the said appeals, Mr. R.K. Murarka urged that the order impugned in the writ application had been made on the erroneous supposition that the State
Government did not have the authority to add to the price which had already been fixed both for
wholesalers and retailers in respect of the sale of kerosene. Furthermore, an erroneous impression
was given that the orders were passed by the district authorities at the behest of the High Court at
Patna in terms of its order passed on 13th May, 1998.;