New Delhi : The Supreme Court on Friday upheld the report and findings of the court-appointed committee that ordered the cancellation of allotment of 297 petrol pumps, kerosene and gas dealerships. The allotments were made in 2002 by the National Democratic Alliance Government.

A three-Judge Bench, comprising Chief Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, Justice C.K. Thakker and Justice R.V. Raveendran, dismissing petitions challenging the report said the committee had considered the question on merits and there was no infirmity in its findings.

The court in December 2002 appointed the committee, headed by the former Supreme Court judge, S.C. Agrawal, and the former Delhi High Court judge, P.K. Bahri, to examine 409 cases of allotments.

The committee felt that in 297 allotments, the selection could not be said to have been made on merits. Aggrieved by it, many of the allottees filed applications questioning the report.During the pendency of the matter the allottees were given protection.

Writing the judgment, Mr. Justice Thakker said, "It could not be said that the committee had exceeded its powers and/or jurisdiction in taking into account other extraneous matters."

The Bench said: "May be that the petitioners have spent some amount. But once the allotment itself was found to be vitiated, obviously they cannot claim any benefit, as allotment was contrary to the law. Moreover, such allotment has been made in the remote past and even though an order of cancellation had been passed by the Central Government as early as in August 2002, the allottees have been protected by interim order passed by this court.

"It is not open to the allottees whose allotments have been found to be vitiated to plead equity. The amicus curiae is right that the committee had considered in detail individual cases and submitted the report. This court, therefore, would consider a complaint of an allottee who can successfully put forward his complaint and may satisfy this court that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the findings of the committee that the allotment was not on merits was not correct.

"It, however, cannot be said that the report of the committee was without power, authority or jurisdiction or was uncalled for and liable to be ignored. We find no infirmity in the conclusions arrived at or reasons recorded by the committee and no interference is called for."

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail