Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Madras

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


LPG Distributors v. Union of India - W.A. No.740 of 2005 [2007] RD-TN 492 (6 February 2007)


Dated : 06/02/2007


The Honourable Mr.Justice P.SATHASIVAM


The Honourable Mr.Justice N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR

W.A.No.740 of 2005


W.A.M.P. No.1418 & 1621 of 2005

LPG Distributors Association

(Tamilnadu and Pondicherry),

rep.by its President,

having office at

No.1,Kamaraj Nagar,


Chennai 600 080. ...Appellant Vs

1. Union of India,

rep.by its Secretary,

Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas,

New Delhi.

2. Indian Oil Corporation

Tamil Nadu State Office,

rep.by its General Manager,

139, Nungambakkam High Road,

Chennai 600 034.

3. K.Subramaniam,


Shri Periyanayaki Amman Gas Service,

36/1, B.S.S.Road,

Uthukuli Main Road,


Tiruppur 641 602.

4. K.K.Ravindran,


Sri Bagavathi Indane Gas System,

Ward No.4-93-2,

Rasipuram Main Road,

Vennandur Post,

Namakkal District.

5. A.Velavendan,


Sri Mangai Indane Gas Agency,

30/1 & 2, Balakrishna Nagar,


Tiruvarur District. ...Respondents (R5 impleaded vide

order of the Court

dated 20.9.2005

made in

WAMP No.3299 of 2005)

This writ appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order in W.P.M.P.No32874 of 2004, 9483 and 9484 of 2005 in W.P.No.26988 of 2004 dated 15.3.2005. For Appellant : Mr.AL.Gandhimathi For Respondents 1,3 & 4 : No appearance For 2nd Respondent : Mr.P.N.Radhakrishnan For 5th Respondent : Mr.G.Nagarajan J U D G M E N T

(Judgment of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM, J.) The above writ appeal is directed against the order dated 15.3.2005 passed in W.P.M.P.Nos.32874 of 2004, 9483 and 9484 of 2005 in W.P.No.26988 of 2004 in and by which the learned single Judge, following the earlier interim order passed in similar circumstances, disposed of the miscellaneous petitions filed by the writ petitioner - LPG Distributors Association.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondents.

3. The main objection of the respondents is that the writ petition filed by the association is not maintainable and secondly the order passed by the learned single Judge in the miscellaneous petition is in terms of the earlier order passed by this Court and there is no ground for interference.

4. We verified the relief prayed for in the writ petition, the earlier order of the learned single Judge of this Court as well as the impugned order, which is challenged in this writ appeal. On going through the same, we are satisfied that there is no ground to interfere in the impugned order at this stage.

5. Consequently, the writ appeal is dismissed. Connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed. No costs. The writ petitioner is free to establish their case while taking up the main writ petition. Considering the fact that the writ petition is of the year 2004, Registry is directed to post W.P.No.26988 of 2004 along with W.P.No.22380 of 2004 on 20.3.2007 for final disposal. vr


1. The Secretary,

Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas,

New Delhi.

2. The General manager,

Indian Oil Corporation

Tamil Nadu State Office,

139, Nungambakkam High Road,

Chennai 600 034.



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.