Your World of Legal Intelligence
 India | 1-800-335-6202

Appeal No. 21 Of 2017 And Ia No.53 Of 2017 & Ia No.120 Of 2017. Case: Indian Oil Corporation Limited Vs Petroleum And Natural Gas Regulatory Board. APTEL (Appellate Tribunal for Electricity)

Document Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Case NumberAppeal No. 21 Of 2017 And Ia No.53 Of 2017 & Ia No.120 Of 2017
Party NameIndian Oil Corporation Limited Vs Petroleum And Natural Gas Regulatory Board
CounselFor Appellant: Mr. Gaurab Banerji, Sr. Adv., Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. Amit Meharia, Ms. Tannishtha Singh, Mr. Rajat Nair, Ms. Sohini Chowdhury Advs. and For Respondents: Mr. Prashant Bezboruah, Mr. Sumit Kishore, Mr. Rakesh Dewan, Mr. Ramji Srinivasan, Sr. Adv., Mr. R. Sudhinder, Mr. Siladitya Chatterjee Mr. Vivek Paul Oriel, Mr. Tushar ...
JudgesMrs. Ranjana P. Desai, Chairperson and Mr. B.N. Talukdar, Technical Member (P&NG)
IssuePetroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board Act, 2006; Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Judgement DateJune 02, 2017
CourtAPTEL (Appellate Tribunal for Electricity)

Order:

  1. The Indian Oil Corporation Limited has challenged in this appeal Order dated 06/12/2016 passed by Respondent No.1 -- the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board ("the Board"). Respondent No.2 is H-Energy Private Limited, a Company engaged in the business of building liquefied natural gas degasification terminals ("H-Energy").

  2. The impugned order arises from a complaint dated 4/8/2016 lodged by H-Energy against the Appellant and its officials alleging, inter alia, violation of the statutory and regulatory provisions in the process of setting up LPG Pipeline from Paradip -- Balasur -- Haldia -- Kalyani -- Durgapur -- Patna - Muzzafarpur by not submitting an expression of interest as per the provisions of the PNGRB (Authorizing Entities to Lay, Build, Operate or Expand Petroleum and Petroleum Products Pipelines) Regulations 2010 ("the Authorizing Regulations") and/or without seeking authorization as required under the provisions of Chapter IV of the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board Act, 2006 ("the PNGRB Act").

  3. The Board has in the impugned order merely recorded the submissions of the Appellant and H-Energy. It has not commented on those submissions. It has however constituted a Committee of the officers of the Board to conduct exhaustive examination and inspection of the record of IOCL, BPCL and HPCL and submit its report within two months. The Board has stated that on receipt of the report, it shall take a final decision. Following is the relevant part of the order:

    "The issue deserving consideration is that whether the intention of the respondent in avoiding the bidding route for seeking authorization involves malafides or there was a genuine and bona fide interpretation of statutory / regulatory provisions, and it needs subtle scrutiny for which the exhaustive examination and inspection of the record of IOCL, BPCL and HPCL appears to be necessary.

    However, we think that the matter does not require investigation by any investigating agency of the State or Central Government including the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and a team of the Board''s officers, as is being constituted hereunder would serve the purpose of facilitating the Board in arriving at just conclusion.

    Therefore, we deem it proper to constitute a Committee to be headed by the Secretary, PNGRB and consisting of two member / deputationists, who are not from the respondent''s company as under:

    ORDER

    A Committee headed by the Secretary, PNGRB and...

To continue reading

Request your trial