IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Interim Relief Application No.312 of 2010 Urgency Application No.489 of 2010 IN Writ Petition No.117/2010 (M/S) M/s Dev Bhumi Gas Service Narendra Nagar Through its proprietor Sri Samay Singh S/o Sri Genda Ram R/o Dev Bhumi Gas Service, Narendra Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal ……… Petitioner Versus Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Through its Chief Regional Manager Loni LPG Regional Office Loni Village Tila Shahbaipur Post Office-Loni, District Gaziabad ……… Respondent Dated: February 03, 2010 HON. B.S. Verma, J. Heard Sri Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Dinesh Gahatori, learned counsel for the respondent. Urgency Application No.489/2010 is allowed. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:- (a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent to give advice in favor of the petitioner on the letter dated 02.12.2009 and further directing the respondent to ensure smooth transfer of 5000 customers of points Muni Ki Reti, Tapovan and Agrakhal in favor of the petitioner and to further ensure equipment movement record (EMR) to the tune of 1000 cylinders and equal quantity of regulators to be issued to the petitioner per week till the transfer process is completed. 2 2 (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent to give advice in favor of the petitioner as per the clause 2(v) of the dealership Agreement and to maintain the stock of the godown of the petitioner to the tune of 800 cylinders and 300 regulators which is officially approved figure of the respondent. (c) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to decide the representation dated 17.11.2009 (Annexure No.18) of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible other petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and injury. (d) Issue any other order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. (e) Award cost of the petition in favor of the petitioner. During the course of arguments, Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he had already made a representation to the respondent but till date no action has been taken on the said representation. He prayed that direction may be issued to the respondent to decide the representation (copy of which is Annexure No.18 to this writ petition) as early as possible. Prayer made is innocuous is nature and deserves to be accepted. The respondent is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure No.18 to the writ petition) as soon as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 3 3 With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (Interim Relief Application No.312/2010 also stands disposed of). (B.S. Verma, J.) Vacation Judge 03.02.2010 RG