Meghalaya High Court
Date Of Decision: 31.07.2025 vs The Indian Oil Corporation Ltd on 31 July, 2025
Author: H. S. Thangkhiew
Bench: H. S. Thangkhiew
2025:MLHC:668
Serial No. 03
Supplementary List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
WP(C) No. 324 of 2025
Date of Decision: 31.07.2025
M/s Rymbai Gas Agency,
Having its office at Jowai, Meghalaya and being represented by
Shri Pearlyone Rynbai,
S/o (L) Sihon Dkhar,
R/o Iawmusiang, Jowai,
West Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya ... Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.,
Having its registered office at Indian Oil Bhawan,
G-9, Ali Yavar Jung Marg, Bandra (East),
Mumbai-400051
2. The Indian Oil-Assam Oil Division,
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.,
North Guwahati LPG Bottling Plant,
P.O. College Nagar, Abhoypur, North Guwahati,
Guwahati-781031 (Assam)
3. The Dy. Deputy General Manager, LPG Sales
North Guwahati LPG Bottling Plant,
P.O. College Nagar, Abhoypur, North Guwahati,
Guwahati-781031 (Assam)
4. The Dy. General Manager (Plant)
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.,
North Guwahati LPG Bottling Plant,
P.O. College Nagar, Abhoypur, North Guwahati,
Guwahati-781031 (Assam) ... Respondent(s)
Page 1 of 5
2025:MLHC:668
________________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. Paul, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. S. Chanda, Adv.
Mr. S. Khyriem, Adv.
Ms. S. Khatun, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. H. Gupta, Adv.
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No
Law journals etc:
ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No
in press:
JUDGEMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
1. Heard Mr. K. Paul, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr.
S. Chanda, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Issue notice.
3. The respondents are represented by Mr. H. Gupta, learned
counsel, who accepts notice on behalf of all the respondents, so no
further notice is called for.
4. The petitioner who is stated to be an LPG Gas Agency
known as M/s Rymbai Gas Agency, is before this Court with the
grievance that the respondents in the recent review of credits/debits
passed to distributors/transporters on account of Market Return
Page 2 of 5
2025:MLHC:668
cylinders in the year 2023-24, have held that credit had incorrectly been
passed to the pre-authorized debit (PAD) account for the empty
cylinders, which is equivalent to 0.58 MT of LPG amounting to Rs.
8,29,652.57/-, without the ERV slips being signed either by the
transporter/distributor, and are now seeking recovery of the said amount
by debiting the same from the Accounts of the petitioner’s Agency.
5. Mr. K. Paul, learned Senior counsel has submitted that the
instant matter emanates from a communication dated 18.02.2025,
whereby the petitioner was called upon to submit an explanation with
proof and documents, as to why the above cited debit/deduction should
not be raised against the said Agency, and that it was also given in the
said communication that failure to submit the explanation within the
stipulated period, the recovery would be made.
6. The learned Senior counsel then submits that pursuant to
the communication, extension of time had been prayed, which was
allowed and thereafter on 28.05.2025, the petitioner had informed the
respondents that the ERVs, which had been duly signed were available
with the Agency, and as such it was prayed that the demand for recovery
be withdrawn. Thereafter, he submits, the petitioner was however asked
to appear personally before the respondent No. 4 on 16.06.2025, which
Page 3 of 5
2025:MLHC:668
was communicated by an e-mail dated 12.06.2025. The petitioner he
submits had duly appeared but however, for reasons unknown, by
another e-mail dated 29.07.2025, they were informed that they had not
been present on the said date. The learned Senior counsel further
submits that in spite of presentation of the ERVs on the appointed day,
the same had not been recorded, and as such the petitioner is now before
this Court praying for appropriate orders and directions, to stay the
recovery proceedings.
7. Mr. H. Gupta, learned counsel for the respondents in reply
has fairly submitted that in view of the situation as projected by the
petitioner, the respondents are prepared to afford another opportunity to
the petitioner to comply with the requirements as requested by the letter
dated 18.02.2025. In this connection, he further submits that as the
petitioner herein has filed the instant petition, it may be put to notice to
comply with the same, and to supply the required details within a period
of 20(Twenty) days from today and the date for personal appearance
thereof, will be fixed by the respondents and communicated
individually.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, and
perused the materials on record, it is noted that the subject matter in
Page 4 of 5
2025:MLHC:668
issue, is limited only to the questioning of the process which has been
adopted by the respondents in ascertaining the ERVs, from the
respective Gas Agencies as demanded by a Notice dated 18.02.2025.
However, as the respondents through the learned counsel have given an
undertaking that the matter will be re-examined, without further
dwelling on the facts, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction
that the petitioner herein, shall file all the required details as demanded
within 20(Twenty) days from the date of this order, and thereafter the
respondents shall fix the date accordingly for personal appearance, to
present their case, who thereafter shall pass a speaking order in
accordance with law. It is further provided till the entire process is
complete, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner, by the
respondents.
9. Needless to add, if any fresh causes of action arises, the
petitioner is at liberty to seek appropriate relief.
10. With the above noted directions, the instant writ petition
stands closed and is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE
Meghalaya
31.07.2025
“V. Lyndem-PS”
Signature Not Verified Page 5 of 5
Digitally signed by
VALENTINO LYNDEM
Date: 2025.07.31 18:22:52 IST
[ad_1]
Source link