Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2015 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 74 - DELHI HIGH COURTNon compliance of mandatory provisions of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 - Method for quantification - Application for direction to be sought to the respondent oil companies to supply petrol/diesel to the members of the appellants on weight basis and alternatively to give temperature adjustment at the time of preparing invoice of the dealers and seeking a direction to the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas to ensure compliance by the respondent oil companies of the provisions of the Legal Metrology Act. Held that:- Can not issue a direction to the respondent oil companies to, under their contract, supply diesel/petrol to the appellants by weight without being satisfied that the same will not affect the other terms and conditions of the said contract and which the appellants have chosen not to place before us.Further it is find that the appellants even under the Legal Metrology Act have failed to make out any case. Rule 12 of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 which in Clause (2)(a) provides that except in the cases of commodities specified in the Fourth Schedule of the Rules, the declaration of the quantity shall be in terms of the unit of mass if the commodity is solid, semi-solid, viscous or a mixture of solid and liquid and which is again indicative of the reference to measurement in units of mass in the Act being to solids, semi-solids, viscous or mixture of solid and liquid. Rule 12(2)(d) categorically provides that the declaration of the quantity shall be in terms of the unit of volume, if the commodity is liquid or is sold by cubic measure. The Fourth Schedule to the said Rules provides that Industrial Diesel Fuel is to be measured in terms of volume, though again it does not refer to petrol and diesel or so with which we are concerned but is again indicative of the measurement in volume in litres being very much in the domain of standard units with which the legal metrology system is concerned. As far as the grievance of the appellants of use by the respondent oil companies of the dip-rod method is concerned, we find that Rule 14 of the Legal Metrology (General) Rules provides that the procedure for carrying out calibration of vehicle tanks etc. as may be specified in the Ninth Schedule thereto. The Ninth Schedule itself, while referring to maximum permissible error, refers to the capacity of vehicle tanks in litre; not only so, it also provides the detailed procedure for measurement by dip-rod method. We have wondered that when the Rules framed under the Act themselves are providing for measurement of vehicle tanks in litres, how can it be said that the unit of litre being used by the respondent oil companies is in contravention of the Act. - No merit in appeals - Decided against Appellant.
|