AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Prasanna B. Varale, CJ
The present petition is filed under the caption ‘PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION’. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that their client expeditiously approached this court upon gaining knowledge of the materials presented, which depicted a starkly different situation. The petitioner, a resident of Tumkur Town, filed this petition seeking a Writ of Certiorari or any other suitable writ to quash the No Objection Certificate dated 7.9.2022, issued by respondent No.3 for the installation of a petrol pump.
Upon thorough examination, it is revealed that the concerned petrol pump is a COCO (Company Only and Company Operated) facility. The records indicate that on 8.7.2022, the Deputy Commissioner of Chikkamagaluru District granted a 'No Objection Certificate' for the storage of the retail outlet in Sy.No.824 of Hiremagaluru village, Kasaba hobli, Chikkamagaluru taluk, Chikkamagaluru district, in favor of M/s Indian Oil Corporation Limited. Various communications referenced as Nos. 1 to 9 in the said NOC were also taken into account, demonstrating that the necessary permissions have been duly obtained from the competent authorities, including the Assistant Electrical Inspector, Panchayath Development Officer, Chief Fire Officer, Executive Engineer of the Public Works Department in Chikkamagaluru, Superintendent of Police of Chikkamagaluru District, & the Assistant Commissioner of Chikkamagaluru Sub-division.
The introductory part of the NOC reaffirms that as these various authorities expressed no objection to granting a license under the Petroleum Rules, 2002, the said Deputy Commissioner, issued the NOC with specific conditions enlisted under the heading "CONDITIONS” as under:
“1. Sufficient open space all around the Retail outlet should be provided for the free movement of the vehicles
The layout plan of the proposed Retail outlet shall be got approved and necessary license shall be obtained before the commencement of outlet from the competent local authorities.
Retail outlet should be installed at a distance as suggested by the PWD Authority, vide reference 7.
No smoking of Fire in any form shall be permitted at any time within the premises. A notice board indicating this shall be exhibited in the premises.
First-aid centre should compulsorily be opened in the proposed premises.
Necessary fire safety measures as suggested by the authorities of Fire & Emergency Services, vide reference cited at 6 shall be strictly complied with.
This NOC is valid for a period of one year from the date of issue within which period the installation work should be completed. This NOC is liable for cancellation in the event of violation of any of the above conditions and Petroleum Rules 2002 by the applicant i.e., M/s Indian Oil Corporation Limited Mangaluru, Authority.
It is noteworthy that although the petitioner claims to have submitted a representation to the authority, the representation/application was forwarded to the authority on two occasions, namely, 16.11.2022 & 22.2.2023. The later one appears to be a standardized representation, a copy of which is attached as Annexure-G. This document solely refers to the applicant, without any signature or mention of the applicant's name. Subsequently, the petition was filed in this court on 9.3.2023. Moreover, the photographic evidence (Annexures-B, B1, and B2) submitted clearly indicates the near-completion of the petrol pump's construction, with the facility being in an operational and functional state. The delayed action of the petitioner raises questions regarding the timing of their approach to the court, and thus the issue of latches too surfaces.
Taking these circumstances into consideration, we opine that the petition seems to be an afterthought or an abortive attempt on petitioner's part to do something ulterior. Considering that the petrol pump is already operational and that petroleum products are essential commodities, the court disinclines to provide any leniency at this late stage, which could potentially inconvenience the public for the vicarious satisfaction of one individual. The fundamental principle guiding this decision is that parties are expected to approach the court within a reasonable time frame and the courts cannot be utilized for individual whims and fancies, as reiterated by the Apex Court in M.P. Housing & Infrastructure Development Board v. Vijay Bodana, (2020) 4 SCC 521.
Consequently, we find the petition to be devoid of merits warranting dismissal at the threshold and accordingly, the petition is dismissed.