Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010036502021 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1322/2021 M/S SUDESHNA OIL TRADERS REP. BY ITS ONE OF THE PARTNER SRI GAURAV KUMAR JAIN AGE 32 YEARS, HAVING ITS OFFICIAL ADDRESS AT HAILAKANDI ROAD, (GHUNGOOR), NEAR REC POINT, SILCHAR- 788010, CACHAR VERSUS INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD AND 3 ORS HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT INDIAN OIL BHAVAN, G09, ALI YAVAR JUNG, BANDRA (EAST), MUMBAI- 400051, MAHARASHTRA 2:REGIONAL OFFICE INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. DIGBOI REFINERY P.O. DIGBOI TINSUKIA ASSAM- 786171 3:THE CHIEF DIVISIONAL RETAIL SALES MANAGER AND CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY SILCHAR DIVISION OFFICE INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. ASSAM OIL DIVISION SILCHAR P.O. SILCHAR CACHAR 4:SALES OFFICER (RS) SILCHAR RSA SILCHAR DIVISION OFFICE INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. ASSAM OIL DIVISION SILCHAR P.O. SILCHAR Page No.# 2/4 CACHAR 5:GILBARCO VEEDER ROOT INDIA PVT. LTD. ART GUILD HOUSE B WING 1ST FLOOR PHEONIX MARKETCITY L.B.S. ROAD KURLA WEST MUMBAI- 400070 (GVR) Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B SHARMA, MR. K N CHOUDHURY,MR. R DUBEY,MR. H DAS Advocate for the Respondent : SC, I O C, MS S SHARMA (R-5) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 30.05.2025 Heard Shri H. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri MK Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri M. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, IOC. Though the name of the learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 appears, there is no representation. 2. This Court is also of the opinion that in view of the order proposed to be passed, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent no. 5. 3. The subject matter of challenge is a show-cause notice dated 21.01.2021 issued by the Corporation which was done after a joint inspection on 29.06.2020. As per the joint inspection, certain anomalies were observed in the operation in the Retail Outlet. The petitioner has cited many reasons as to why the observations made in the inspection dated 29.06.220 are incorrect and not liable to be taken into consideration. Page No.# 3/4 4. On the other hand, the learned Senior Counsel for the Corporation has submitted that no final decision was taken by the Corporation and the proceeding was at a nascent stage of issuing show-cause notice and at that stage, the instant writ petition was filed in which, there is an interim order passed on 21.05.2022 for maintaining the status-quo in respect of the supply of the petroleum products. He submits that no cause of action had actually arisen entitling the petitioners to approach this Court. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the subject matter involved, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition is liable to be disposed of by the following directions. The said directions have been made as pendency of the case along with interim order since the year 2021 may not be serving the interest of justice. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of by directing that the proceeding which was initiated vide the show-cause notice dated 21.01.2021 be brought to a logical conclusion in accordance with law in which the petitioner should be given full opportunity to represent his case. To expedite the proceeding, the petitioner is directed to submit his show-cause notice reply along with all documents and evidence that would be relied upon within a period of 15 days from today and on receipt of the same, the representative of the petitioner be granted a personal hearing. 7. It is however directed that till such decision is taken, the present arrangement of supply be continued with the petitioner which would however depend on the final outcome of the proceedings. It is needless to state that if any further grievances arise, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum. Page No.# 4/4 8. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of in terms of the observation made above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant