Bombay High Court: In a petition before the Court, the preliminary objection raised by the respondent 1 was regarding its maintainability, on the ground that the impugned order could have been alternatively remedied as per Clause 4.2.14 of the respondent’s policy for Holiday Listing of the Vendors (“Policy”). The Division Bench comprising of Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ., and Amit Borkar, J. was not convinced with the objection of maintainability of the instant petition and noted that the Policy remedy was optional. The Court further noted the contention of the petitioners that the appellate authority for the Policy remedy would have been comprised of respondent’s officers; the same could not be permitted as the respondent could not be a judge in their own cause.
The respondent contended that the impugned order was appealed against by the petitioners under the Policy and through a writ petition before the Guwahati High Court; however, the Policy appeal was later withdrawn by the petitioners. Therefore, the respondent contended that due to the availability of a remedy through appeal under the Policy, the instant petition may not be entertained.
On the contrary, the petitioners contended that the remedy of appeal was not efficacious for the reasons, (1) it was only optional; and (2) the appellate authority would have comprised of the officers of the respondent, and since no one can be a judge in their own cause, the same would have been a violation of the principles of natural justice.
The Court noted that the limitation of 15 days provided in Clause 4.2.14 had already expired, as the appeal, which was earlier filed by the petitioners, was withdrawn because the petitioner had preferred a writ petition before the Guwahati High Court. Therefore, the Court overruled the objection raised by the respondent as to the maintainability of the instant petition, and a three-week window was granted to the respondents to file an affidavit-in-reply. The petitioners were also granted two weeks’ time to file any rejoinder-affidavit.
The Court issued a stand over to 29-08-2024.
[Mukand Poly Products v. BPCL, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 2347, decided on 22-07-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the petitioners: Dr. Veerendra Tulzapurkar, Senior Advocate; Pranjit Bhattacharya, Avdhoot Prabhu i/b Lex Services
For the respondents: Pankaj Savant, Senior Advocate; Amol Bavare, Rutu Pawar i/b Pragnya Legal
