Jaipur: The Rajasthan High Court, in a significant interim order, has allowed the temporary operation of a disputed HPCL petrol pump in Ajmer district’s Bhinyai area, while also staying the ₹2.50 lakh cost imposed earlier on the petitioner by a Single Bench.
The Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Ashutosh Kumar passed the order while hearing an appeal against the judgment of the Single Bench dated May 8, 2026.
The court, however, made it clear that the interim permission to operate the petrol pump would not create any permanent rights or equity in favour of the respondents. The Bench observed that if the final decision goes against the petrol pump operators, they would have to shut down the outlet at their own expense.
The matter has been pending before the High Court for nearly five years. Notices have now been issued in the appeal and the matter has been listed for final hearing on July 16, 2026.
The dispute relates to a retail outlet dealership granted by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL) on land situated at Khasra Nos. 2548 and 2550 in Bhinyai area of Ajmer district. The Ajmer District Collector had issued a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for the petrol pump on August 11, 2021, following which HPCL allotted the dealership to Abhishek Joshi.
The NOC and dealership were challenged before the High Court by petitioner Deepak Acharya, who alleged that the proposed petrol pump site violated safety and environmental norms. According to the petition, a cremation ground, school, high-tension electricity lines and a 33 KV grid station were located near the site. Objections were also raised regarding obstruction of natural water flow.
The petitioner contended that the NOC was granted contrary to applicable rules, environmental standards and safety norms prescribed for petrol pump establishments. It was also argued that the conditions and guidelines laid down by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) were not properly complied with.
On the other hand, HPCL, the district administration and the dealership holder submitted before the court that the petitioner himself operates an Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) petrol pump and had concealed this fact from the court. The respondents alleged that the petition was filed merely to obstruct business competition and maintain monopoly in the area.
The respondents further submitted that all required permissions had been obtained from the police department, PWD, fire department, Panchayat authorities and water department before issuance of the NOC by the District Collector. It was also informed that the Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organization (PESO) had subsequently granted licence for the petrol pump.
Earlier, while dismissing the writ petition on May 8, 2026, Justice Sameer Jain of the High Court had imposed an exemplary cost of ₹2.50 lakh on the petitioner, observing that material facts had been concealed and the judicial process had been misused for business rivalry.
The Single Bench had also observed that due to an interim stay order passed on October 6, 2021, the petrol pump project remained stalled for almost five years, causing substantial financial losses to the concerned parties. The court had directed payment of ₹1 lakh each to HPCL and dealership holder Abhishek Joshi, and ₹50,000 to the Ajmer Collector.
Challenging the Single Bench order, the petitioner filed a special appeal through advocates Sunil Samdariya and Arihant Asamdariya. It was argued before the Division Bench that the Single Bench failed to properly examine compliance of the NOC with NGT guidelines and environmental norms.
The petitioner also argued that despite the pendency of the writ petition and interim stay order, the petrol pump was subsequently made operational, raising concerns regarding public safety, environment and local residents.
The Division Bench observed that the validity of the NOC in light of NGT guidelines and other conditions required detailed consideration. Taking note of the fact that the interim stay remained operative during pendency of the writ petition, the court permitted temporary operation of the petrol pump while clarifying that the arrangement would remain subject to the final outcome of the case.
The Bench also stayed the operation of the ₹2.50 lakh cost imposed by the Single Bench until further orders.