In Brief
GAIL, a state-owned gas supplier with a monopoly, charged IPCL, a petrochemical manufacturer, for 'loss of transportation' through GAIL's pipeline despite government orders requiring IPCL to build and use its own separate pipeline. IPCL challenged this as arbitrary and discriminatory. The Supreme Court held that writ jurisdiction was available despite the commercial contract because GAIL, as a state entity in a monopolistic position, had acted discriminatorily in violation of Article 14. The charges were quashed as unfair. However, refund was restricted to three years before the petition was filed to reflect limitation principles, as IPCL had delayed five years in approaching the court.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.