Leave granted.
In this appeal, the appellant, said to be the Chief
Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Divisional Office, Indian
Oil Corporation Limited, Gorakhpur has questioned the order
dated 30.09.2021, as passed by the High Court of Judicature
at Allahabad in Contempt Application (Civil) No. 3938 of
2021, whereby the High Court directed that the appeal filed
by the applicant (respondent herein) shall be decided by
the Dispute Resolution Panel, Gorakhpur within a month;
failing which, the present petitioner shall appear in-
person before the Court on the next date.
The relevant background aspects of the matter are
that the present respondent preferred a writ petition
bearing No. 26456 of 2020 in the High Court questioning the
dealership was terminated while giving an option to
challenge the termination order by way of an appeal within
30 days along with fees in the sum of Rs. 5,00,000/-
(Rupees Five Lakhs).
The High Court, in its order dated 19.01.2021 in the
said writ petition, formed an opinion that the order in
question requiring pre-deposit of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees
Five Lakhs) was not sustainable and hence, directed that if
the appeal was preferred within 10 days, the Appellate
Authority would consider the same without insisting upon
pre-deposit as per the amended Marketing Discipline
Guidelines, 2012. The appeal having not been decided, the
respondent filed the aforesaid Contempt Application bearing
No. 3938 of 2021.
In the impugned order dated 30.09.2021 in the said
contempt application, the High Court, even after taking
note of the fact that the procedure for hearing of the
appeals had changed under the new guidelines, proceeded to
direct that the appeal filed by the present respondent be
decided by the Dispute Resolution Panel, as per the
guidelines existing on the date of filing of appeal; and
even directed the present appellant to remain personally
present before the Court, if the appeal was not so decided.
On 29.10.2021, after examining the contents of the
order impugned and the material placed on record, this
Court, while issuing notice in the petition leading to this
appeal [SLP(C) No. 16767 of 2021], stayed the operation and
effect of the impugned order dated 30.09.2021.
It appears that in the meantime, the respondent had
also filed another writ petition, being Writ-C No.23870 of
2021, challenging the process whereby its appeal had been
forwarded to the Appellate Authority at the Head Office,
instead of the Dispute Resolution Forum.
Now, by way of an application (I.A. 169869 of 2021),
it has been pointed out on behalf of the appellant that
after passing of the aforesaid order dated 29.10.2021 by
this Court, the High Court had finally disposed of the said
writ petition (No. 23870 of 2021) by its order dated
09.11.2021.
In the aforesaid order dated 09.11.2021, the High
Court took note of the admitted fact that during the
pendency of appeal, the appellate forum had changed in view
of the amendments in the guidelines; and the Dispute
Resolution Forum, as provided earlier, was not in
existence. The High Court also took note of the fact that
there was no challenge to the amended guidelines, which
provide that the Director, Indian Oil Corporation Limited
shall be the Appellate Authority. Thus, the High Court
found no ground to issue mandamus so as to place the appeal
filed by the present respondent before the Dispute
Resolution Forum. The High Court also took note of the
submission made by the present respondent (writ petitioner)
that it would be giving up the claim to place the appeal
before the erstwhile forum and agreed for disposal of the
appeal as per the amended guidelines. While disposing of
the writ petition, the High Court also provided for
expeditious proceedings by the Appellate Authority. It has
further been pointed out that the Appellate Authority
indeed examined the appeal and heard the parties on
16.12.2021.
In view of the subsequent events above-mentioned, it
is but clear that the present respondent has given up its
insistence for decision of the appeal by way of erstwhile
mechanism, and rightly so because, even if the respondent
(writ petitioner) had the right of consideration of appeal,
it had no corresponding right to insist for consideration
of the appeal by a forum that was no longer in existence.
We need not dilate further on the matter. Suffice it
to observe that the impugned order dated 30.09.2021, which
was even otherwise questionable for being not in conformity
with law, has lost its relevance and even the contempt
proceedings in the High Court in Contempt Application
(Civil) No. 3938 of 2021 are rendered redundant.
Therefore, it appears just and appropriate that the
impugned order dated 30.09.2021 be set aside and the said
contempt proceedings be also closed.
Accordingly, and in view of the above, this appeal is
allowed; the impugned order dated 30.09.2021 is set aside;
and the proceedings before the High Court in Contempt
Application (Civil) No. 3938 of 2021 stand closed.
No costs.
MARCH 07, 2022.