Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Smital Petroleum Thro Kalanbhai G Rathod vs State Of Gujarat &

High Court Of Gujarat|24 February, 2012
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner herein to quash and set aside the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 of withholding the stock of 5431 liters of petrol and not returning the same by respondent No.3.
2. It appears that 5431 liters of petrol was seized from the petitioner on the ground that it was adulterated. After the same was seized, respondent No.2 handed over the possession of the said 5431 liters of petrol to respondent No.3 and it appears that the said quantity of petrol was reprocessed by respondent No.3 treating it as adulterated petrol. It appears that thereafter the Collector passed an order to confiscate the aforesaid quantity of petrol and the same was subject to challenge before this Court and learned Single Judge held in favour of the petitioner and quash and set aside the order passed by respondent No.2- Collector confiscating the entire quantity of petrol. Thereafter, petitioner approached respondent No.3 to return the said quantity of petrol. Respondent No.2 directed respondent No.3 to hand over the stock of said quantity of petrol and/or make the payment of stock equivalent to the price of said quantity of petrol. However, nothing was done and, therefore, the petitioner has preferred the present petition before this Court for the aforesaid reliefs.
3. Today when the present petition is taken up for final hearing, it is submitted by Ms.Minu Shah, learned advocate appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 that respondent No.3 is ready and willing to make the payment of aforesaid quantity of petrol as per guidelines from the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas dated 21/12/2001 by paying the price of the off–spec and Refinery Gate Price (RPG) of the furnace oil at the time of receipt of the product at the refinery. It is submitted that the aforesaid payment shall be made to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from today.
4. Mr.H.R.Prajapati, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, under the instructions from the petitioner, has stated at the bar that the petitioner is agreeable to accept the same as full and final settlement of his claim with respect to the aforesaid and, therefore, he seeks permission to withdraw the present petition. However, he has requested to consider the request of the petitioner to award interest on the aforesaid amount to be paid to the petitioner.
Ms.Minu Shah, learned advocate appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 has submitted that as such on receipt of the aforesaid amount, the petitioner has agreed to withdraw the present petition unconditionally.
5. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Respondent No.3 is directed to act as stated hereinabove and make the payment to the petitioner as agreed hereinabove and as per the Guidelines issued by Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, within a period of four weeks from today with respect to 5431 liters of petrol. It will be open for the petitioner to request for grant of reasonable interest on the said amount, which may be considered by the concerned respondent No.3 sympathetically. However, if the same is denied and there is any dispute with respect to rate of interest, it will not give fresh cause of action for the petitioner to file another petition. Rule is discharged.
*dipti [M.R.SHAH,J]
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Smital Petroleum Thro Kalanbhai G Rathod vs State Of Gujarat &

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
24 February, 2012
Judges
  • M R Shah
Advocates
  • Mr Hr Prajapati