1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 1081 of 2011 Petitioner : Naresh son of Khushalrao Dongre, aged about 41 years, occ: business, resident of Ward No. 1, Kondhali, District Nagpur versus Respondents: 1) The Union of India .. .. Deleted 2) Managing Director, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, 17, J. Tata Marg, Mumbai-20 3) Sr. Regional Manager, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Khapri LPG Filling Plant, Khapri, Nagpur-08 Mr Shashibhushan Wahane, Advocate for petitioner Respondent no. 1 deleted Mr P. D. Meghe, Advocate for respondents no. 2 and 3 Coram : B. P. Dharmadhikari and A. P. Bhangale, JJ Dated : 23rd November 2011 2 Oral Judgment (Per B. P. Dharmadhikari, J) 1. Heard Mr Shashibhushan Wahane, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr P. D. Meghe, learned counsel for respondents no. 2 and 3. Respondent no.1 is already deleted. Rule. Heard forthwith by consent of parties. 2. We had heard learned counsel for the parties on 13th October 2011 and thereafter respondents were directed to produce relevant material on record. Respondents have filed additional reply on affidavit on 22.11.2011. 3. We have perused the material produced along with reply affidavit dated 22.11.2011. Clause 2 of the Scheme states size of land required for having go-down to be 20 meter by 24 meter. This requirement is as per communication 6th August 2009 issued by the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas. The Industry Record Note on Modification/Clarification dated 15th June 2010 vide clause 6 contemplates storage capacity of 5000 kg after amendment. Form “F” meant for Licence To Store Compressed Gas In Cylinders produced by respondents no. 2 and 3 shows that if quantity of compressed gas to be stored is between 4001-6000 kg, maximum distance to be kept clear is 6 metres. However, the Chief Controller has been given discretion to reduce the distance. 4. Admittedly, in this matter, plot of the petitioner is not 20 meter 3 by 24 meter, but it is 18.28 meter by 30.48 meter. Hence, even if requirement of keeping minimum distance of 6 metre is applied to the plot of petitioner, the land which is available for construction of go-down is 18 metre x 6 metre i.e. about 108 square metres. If the specifications of respondents no. 2 and 3 are accepted, land needed is only 96 square metres. In these circumstances, the question is, whether plot of land of the petitioner can be viewed as nonviable and not suitable for construction of godown. We also note that ultimately the Chief Controller has been given power to even reduce this distance of 6 metre. 5. Therefore, without concluding the issue involved in the present matter and in view of the above observations, we quash and set aside the order dated 3rd December 2010 and direct respondent no. 3 to take fresh decision after considering the above material and if necessary, petitioner shall also be given opportunity of being heard. The appropriate decision shall be taken within eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. 6. Writ Petition is thus partly allowed and disposed of as such. No order as to costs. A. P. BHANGALE, J B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J joshi