Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court heard a public interest petition filed by Common Cause, a registered society, under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, challenging the allotments of retail outlets for petroleum products (petrol pumps) made by Captain Satish Sharma, Minister of State for Petroleum & Natural Gas, exercising the powers of the Central Government. The petition was precipitated by a news item dated August 11, 1995, published on the front page of the Indian Express under the caption 'In Satish Sharma’s Reign, Petrol and Patronage Flow Together'. The report alleged that petrol pumps and gas agencies were allotted from the discretionary quota of the Petroleum Minister to relatives of politicians, members of Oil Selection Boards (OSBs), and officials of the Ministry, often on compassionate grounds. Specific instances mentioned included relatives of the Minister's driver and additional private secretary, wives of ministry clerks and stenographers, relatives of the private secretary to the Minister, and various OSB members or their kin. Mr. H.D. Shourie, Director of Common Cause, appearing in person, drew the Court's attention to the news item. The Solicitor General, who was present in Court, took notice and stated that the matter would be examined and an affidavit filed. Accordingly, Mr. Vijay L. Kelkar, Secretary in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, filed an affidavit dated October 9, 1995. The affidavit stated that under the approved guidelines, the Minister personally decided each case and the order was a speaking order. It denied that allotments were made on account of alleged relationships or any improper motive, claiming that relationship of an applicant with any official of the Ministry was not a relevant factor in considering discretionary allotment on compassionate grounds. On October 13, 1995, the Court examined the affidavit and directed the Ministry to file a further and better affidavit with reference to the specific instances. In compliance, Mr. Kelkar filed a second affidavit dated October 28, 1995, which grouped the allottees into three categories: those related to politicians, those related to members of OSBs or the members themselves, and those related to officials in the Ministry. The affidavit admitted several relationships, including that Sarbjot Singh was the son of Shri Buta Singh; the allottee was the son of a Minister in the State Government of Nagaland; Syed Shaukat Hasan Abidi was the son of Justice S.H. Abidi, Chairman of the OSB for Uttar Pradesh; Shiv Balak Passi was a member of the OSB for Madhya Pradesh; Pradeep Kumar was the son of Krishna Swaroop, member of OSB for Delhi and Chandigarh; Ghulam Ahmad Mir was a member of OSB Delhi; Smt. Nena Nautiyal was the wife of R.S. Nautiyal, member of OSB Punjab; Arun Kumar Gupta was the son of Justice Harbanslal Gupta, Chairman of OSB Haryana; and various other relationships with ministry officials were confirmed. The Court issued notices to all 15 persons mentioned in the affidavit of Mr. Kelkar. Thirteen of them filed affidavits justifying the allotments made to them by Captain Satish Sharma. By order dated December 6, 1995, the Court directed that the Minister may file an affidavit if he so desired. Captain Satish Sharma did not file any affidavit. The relevant records were produced before the Court. The matter concerned the legality and propriety of discretionary allotments of petrol pumps, focusing on whether the exercise of such discretion was arbitrary and contrary to the rule of law.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Public Interest Litigation - Article 32, Constitution of India - Petition filed by registered society challenging discretionary allotments of petrol pumps by Minister; Court entertained PIL and directed affidavits from Ministry, then issued notices to allottees; Minister given opportunity to file affidavit but did not. B) Administrative Law - Discretionary Allotments - Arbitrary Exercise of Power - No specific Act cited - Allotments from discretionary quota on compassionate grounds to relatives of politicians, OSB members, and ministry officials alleged as favoritism and nepotism; Ministry denied impropriety claiming orders were speaking orders and on merits; Court directed further affidavit and examined records.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the discretionary allotments of petrol pumps by the Minister of State for Petroleum & Natural Gas were arbitrary, discriminatory, and an abuse of power warranting judicial intervention under Article 32 of the Constitution of India
Law Points
- Public interest litigation under Article 32
- judicial review of discretionary administrative action
- arbitrary exercise of discretionary quota
- compassionate grounds allotments
- favoritism and nepotism in government allotments
