TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Delayed writ petition challenging LPG distributorship approval dismissed as delay defeats equity claims</h1> <h3>Mrinmoy Maity Versus Chhanda Koley and Ors</h3> Mrinmoy Maity Versus Chhanda Koley and Ors - TMI Issues Involved:1. Justification of the writ court in entertaining the writ petition.2. Locus standi of the Respondent No. 1.3. Delay and latches in filing the writ petition.4. Validity of the alternate land offered by the Appellant.Summary:1. Justification of the writ court in entertaining the writ petition:The core issue was whether the writ court was justified in entertaining the writ petition challenging the approval granted to the Appellant for starting LPG distributorship at Jamalpur, District Burdwan. The appellate court had allowed the appeal on the grounds that the successful applicant had not offered unencumbered land for construction, the land offered was in contravention of guidelines, and the amendment to the guidelines could not be applied retrospectively.2. Locus standi of the Respondent No. 1:The Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that Respondent No. 1 had no locus standi as she had participated in the selection process and was unsuccessful. This dismissal was contested, but the Supreme Court upheld the Single Judge's decision, emphasizing that the writ Petitioner should have been non-suited on the ground of delay and latches.3. Delay and latches in filing the writ petition:The Supreme Court underscored that the writ Petitioner approached the court belatedly, which should have led to the dismissal of the writ petition. The Court reiterated that delay defeats equity and emphasized that extraordinary relief should not be granted to those who sleep over their rights. The Court cited precedents to support the principle that inordinate delay in invoking writ jurisdiction is a valid ground for dismissal.4. Validity of the alternate land offered by the Appellant:The Appellant had initially offered Barga land, which was later substituted with alternate land. The Corporation accepted this alternate land based on subsequent guidelines allowing flexibility. The Supreme Court found no reason to substitute the Corporation's discretion, as the alternate land met the specifications and was found suitable for construction.Conclusion:The Supreme Court set aside the order of the Learned Division Bench and restored the order of the Learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition on the grounds of delay and latches and upheld the Appellant's right to the LPG distributorship. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
