9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the eligibility criteria for grant of LPG distributorship, specifically focusing on criminal offences involving moral turpitude/economic offences and the impact of delay and laches in approaching the court for relief. Eligibility Criteria for LPG Distributorship: The case involved a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, responsible for allotment of LPG distributorship. Advertisements were issued specifying that candidates convicted for criminal offences involving moral turpitude/economic offences or against whom charges were framed by the court were ineligible for the distributorship. However, discrepancies were noted in different advertisements regarding the disqualification criteria based on criminal charges or convictions. Application Process and Field Investigation: The respondent in question had faced criminal charges in the past, which were not disclosed during the application process for LPG distributorship. Despite being selected as a suitable candidate, the respondent's empanelment was later canceled due to the discovery of the criminal case history during a field investigation. The appellant, who was also a candidate, was issued a letter of intent and commenced business operations. Legal Proceedings and Delay in Seeking Relief: The respondent filed a writ petition challenging the decision to not award the dealership, but did not request to set aside the allotment made to the appellant. The court noted a significant delay and laches in the respondent's approach to seeking legal remedy, which impacted the equitable considerations in the case. The court emphasized the importance of timely legal actions in such matters. Court's Decision and Equitable Principles: The court observed that the respondent did not challenge the grant of dealership to the appellant promptly, leading to a significant delay in seeking legal recourse. Considering the substantial investments and infrastructure required for an LPG dealership, the court found that the High Court had erred in not considering these factors adequately. Consequently, the impugned judgment was set aside, and the appeals were allowed without any order as to costs. This summary highlights the key issues, application process details, legal proceedings, and the court's decision, emphasizing the impact of delay and equitable principles in the judgment.
|
