C.W.P. No. 8602 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 8602 of 2009 Date of decision: 17.1.2011 Rajesh Angra Panch ................Petitioner Versus Union of India and Others ..................Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. C.L.Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner Ms Madhu Dayal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Advocate, for respondent No.2 Mr. Sanjay Vij, Advocate, for respondent No.4. RANJAN GOGOI, ACJ. : (Oral) This PIL has been filed seeking interference of the court with regard to the irregularities and illegal acts committed by respondent No.4 who is running an agency under the respondent corporation in respect of LPG cylinders. The details of the irregularities have been mentioned in the writ petition filed. In response, the Corporation respondent No.2, has filed an affidavit giving the dates of commission of certain irregularities by the 4th respondent and the action taken in this regard. Learned counsel for the Corporation has laid before the Court the norms for taking steps for cancellation of licence. The said norms are to the effect that two major C.W.P. No. 8602 of 2009 2 irregularities/mal-practices leading of imposition of penalty must have occurred within two years. According to the learned counsel for the Corporation, the aforesaid situation has not occurred in the present case and therefore for each illegality committed penalty by way of fine has been imposed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed before the court a communication dated 7.5.2010 received by him from the authority of the Corporation under the Right to Information Act. The same would go to show that on 12.3.2008, 16.9.2008, 24.9.2008, 4.10.2008, 21.11.2008 and 29.12.2008 incidents of black-marketing had taken place in the running of the agency by respondent No.4. For the aforesaid acts, as the communication under the Right to Information Act issued to the petitioner would indicate, fine of Rs.22,05,000/- has been imposed in respect of four such incidents. It is stated that out of Rs.22,05,000/- imposed as fine, a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- has been paid by the 4th respondent whereas remaining part of the fine is pending adjudication before the Arbitrator. We fail to see as to how the instances of black-marketing that have taken place between 12.3.2008 to 29.12.2009 could have been understood by the Corporation to be not attracting the provisions for cancellation of the licence of the 4th respondent. From the communication received by the petitioner it appears that four incidents of black-marketing have been clubbed together and composite fine of Rs.22,05,000/- has been imposed instead of treating each of such incidents as a separate incident of black-marketing. In such circumstances, we direct the Corporation to proceed against respondent No.4 in accordance with its norms for C.W.P. No. 8602 of 2009 3 cancellation of licence after giving the said respondent an opportunity to show cause. Necessary orders in this regard will be passed by the Corporation within a period of three months from the date of a receipt of a certified copy of this order. This PIL stands disposed of in the above terms. (RANJAN GOGOI) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE January 17, 2011 RSK NOTE: Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not? _____