IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 13690 of 2008 Between: M.K.Agarwal, S/o. M.K.Sedhmal Agarwal, R/o. H.NO.SRT-6, S.R.Nagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Union of India, rep by its Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum, New Delhi. 2 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Commissioner, Civil Supplies, Hyderabad. 3 Indian Oil Corporation Limited, rep by its Chairman & Managing Director, 3079/3, JB Tito Marg, Sadiq Nagar, New Delhi. 4 Bharat Petroleum Corproation Limited, rep by its Chairman & Managing Director, Mumbai. 5 Hindustan Petrol Corporation Limited, Rep by its Chairman & Managing Director, Hyderabad. 6 The Indo Burma Petroleum Company Limited, Rep by its Chairman & Managing Director, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, Declaring the action of the respondents herein in intentionally making the artificial scarcity of petrol and diesel and selling only the branded petrol and diesel as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the principles of natrual justice and consequently direct the Res No.1 and 2 herein to direct the Respondents Nos.3 to 6 herein to regulate the outlets to ensure theavailability of the filing and supply of normal petrol and diesel, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.Y.BALAJI Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : Order: (Per Anil R. Dave, CJ) This is a public interest litigation alleging that same quality of petrol is being sold at different rates under the pretext that the said petrol is branded. No evidence in the nature of report of experts has been placed on record. No effort has been made by the petitioner to get the grievance redressed by a competent authority. In our opinion, the petition is absolutely vague and, therefore, it is not maintainable. We do not see any reason to entertain the same. The petition is therefore dismissed with no order as to costs. _____________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 30th June, 2008. _________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J GRR