The Allahabad High Court has held that an unexplained delay of more than two years in issuing a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for a petrol retail outlet amounted to "malice in law" and reflected arbitrary administrative action. The Court observed that public authorities cannot keep applications pending indefinitely without a lawful reason, especially when such delay affects a citizen's right to carry on a lawful business.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar Gupta, had received a Letter of Intent from Reliance BP Mobility Limited on 29 March 2024 for establishing a fuel retail outlet in Fatehpur district. After securing NOCs from several departments, the only pending approval was the District Magistrate's NOC, which remained undecided for over two years despite repeated requests. The petitioner ultimately approached the High Court seeking directions for issuance of the certificate.
During the proceedings, the High Court repeatedly questioned the District Magistrate over the prolonged inaction and even directed the officer to appear personally before the Court. Following these proceedings, the District Magistrate finally issued the required NOC and placed it on record through a personal affidavit.
Court's Observations
A Division Bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Indrajeet Shukla found no satisfactory explanation for the prolonged delay.
The bench observed,
“The delay in decision-making, without any plausible cause, itself is an indication of malice in law, also exhibiting arbitrariness writ large.”
The Court explained that "malice in law" does not necessarily mean personal ill-will. Instead, it refers to official action taken without lawful justification or in disregard of legal duties. Relying on several Supreme Court decisions, the Bench said arbitrary administrative inaction can violate constitutional guarantees under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21, particularly where it prevents a person from carrying on a lawful trade or business.
The Court also noted that blaming a lower-level clerk could not justify the conduct of senior officers who allowed the matter to remain pending despite government policies requiring timely decisions.
Court's Decision
Since the NOC had already been issued during the pendency of the proceedings, the High Court held that no further relief remained to be granted on the writ petition. However, it directed the oil company to proceed expeditiously on the basis of the Letter of Intent issued in March 2024.
The Court also expected the District Magistrate's office to act promptly in future matters involving citizens' rights and disposed of the petition without imposing costs.
Case Details
- Case Title: Rakesh Kumar Gupta v. Union of India and 3 Others
- Case Number: WRIT - C No. 23761 of 2026
- Judge: Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Indrajeet Shukla
- Decision Date: 30 July 2026
