Gauhati High Court Kabita Das vs Union Of India And 4 Ors on 21 August, 2023 Page No.# 1/15 GAHC010191532022 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6192/2022 KABITA DAS W/O GANESH CH DAS, VILL AND P.O. PATILADOHA, DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM, PIN 783391 VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS. REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS, GOVT. OF INDIA, SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI 110001 2:UNDER SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS GOVT. OF INDIA SHASTRI BHAWAN NEW DELHI 110001 3:BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. REP. BY THE TERRITORY MANAGER (RETAIL) GUWAHATI RETAIL TERRITORY OFFICE 1ST FLOOR NEXIA PARK GMCH ROAD CHRISTIAN BASTI GUWAHATI KAMRUP (M) DISTRICT PIN 781005 4:INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. REP. BY THE CHIEF DIVISIONAL RETAIL SALES MANAGER SECTOR3 NOONMATI GHY781020 (ASSAM) 5:SENIOR SALES OFFICER BARPETA RETAIL SALES AREA INDIAN OIL CORPORATION Page No.# 2/15 EAST POINT TOWER 4TH FLOOR BAMUNIMAIDAM PIN 78102 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA For the Petitioner : Mr. D. Das. .... Senior Advocate. Mr. R. Sarma. ... Advocate For the respondent nos.1 & 2: Mr. S.S. Roy .... CGC For the respondent no.3 : Mr. S. Borthakur .... Advocate. For the respondent nos.4 & 5: Mr. P. Bharadwaj .... Advocate Date of hearing : 16.08.2023 Date of judgment : 21.08.2023 JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV) Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. R. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S. Roy, learned CGC for the respondent nos.1 & 2; Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 and Mr. P. Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 & 5. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the feasibility report dated 15.11.2018, on the basis of which Notice dated 25.11.2018 was published, for appointment of a Rural Retail Outlet (RO) dealer by the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. The Page No.# 3/15 retail outlet (petrol pump) that was to be set up was at Patiladaha Highway, within 5 kms from NH17 intersection, which is in close vicinity to the petitioner's petrol pump. 3. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner has a petrol pump in the said area in the name of Patiladaha Ananta KSK. He submits that for opening up of a new retail outlet, the Government of India, Ministry of Petrol and Natural Gas had issued guidelines/criteria to be followed by Oil Manufacturing Companies vide letter No. P19011/5/2010IOC dated 06.04.2011, addressed to the Chief Executive Officers of the three Oil Manufacturing Companies (OMCs), i.e. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Indian Oil Corporation. In terms of the said letter dated 06.04.2011, a feasibility study was to be made by Oil Manufacturing companies for opening new retail outlets wherein, they were to consider the appropriate returns/financial viability of the new retail outlet. He submits that as per the letter dated 06.04.2011, a oil manufacturing company may work out a mechanism where the ED (Retail) of the three OMCs, may decide by consensus, on expansion of network in new areas like developing suburbs in cities, new highways, road bypass etc. He submits that though the respondent No. 3 has issued a notice for opening a new RO in a Rural area near the location of the petitioner's petrol pump, in terms of the feasibility report dated 15.11.2018 and the Notice dated 25.11.2018, the said feasibility report does not make a mention of the petitioner's petrol pump. He submits that the feasibility report had been made after considering two petrol pumps, which were at a further distance from the petitioner's petrol pump. As such, the respondent No. 3 should be directed to make a new feasibility report, in which the petitioner's petrol pump should be considered and thereafter, consider if it Page No.# 4/15 would be feasible to have a new RO. 4. Mr. D. Das, learned Senior Counsel submits that in terms of letter dated 06.04.2011 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Petroleum & Natu