(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to cancel all the Final Explosives License issued by the 2nd respondent to respondents 4 to 7 to establish and operate Petroleum Retail Outlets in Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry by accepting the forged and fabricated copies of No Objection Certificates of district authorities and accompanying documents without verification and consequently to initiate appropriate criminal and civil actions in accordance with law against the 2nd and 4th to 7th respondents for the offences committed by them.)
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, C.J.
1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to cancel all the final explosives licenses issued by the second respondent to respondents 4 to 7 to establish and operate petroleum retail outlets in Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry, by accepting the forged and fabricated copies of No Objection Certificates of district authorities and accompanying documents without verification and consequently to initiate appropriate criminal and civil actions in accordance with law against the 2nd and 4th to 7th respondents for the offences committed by them.
2. The relevant facts which gave rise to the filing of the present petition are that while hearing a habeas corpus petition in the case of Ms.Lalitha, in the matter of detention, based on certain allegations that the petitioner’s husband and his associates created fake no objection certificates as though they were issued by the Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, using fake seal as well as forged signatures of the authority, this Court felt the need of deciding the larger issue of fake no objection certificates obtained by various parties.
3. The startling facts which were brought to the notice of this Court are as under:
“11. It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the Director General of Police has written to all the Superintendents of Police to give a requisition to the concerned District Collectors and collect the necessary information. Similarly, the Director General of Police has also written to the Chief Controller of Explosives, PESO, Nagpur and Chief Controller of Explosives, PESO, Chennai to provide copies of licence and No Objection Certificates issued for opening fuel outlets in Tamil Nadu at the earliest. Moreover, it is pointed out that PESO officials in Chennai are allowing the Police officials to search and take out the certificates on their own. The PESO, South Circle office at Chennai controls five southern States and the documents are kept in a godown and it would be impossible for third parties to search and find out the documents. The PESO authorities would be well-versed with the documents and therefore, they are directed to furnish the originals of licences and No Objection Certificates issued for opening fuel (LPG/CNG) outlets and energy outlets in Tamil Nadu on or before 14.08.2020.”
4. On 01.10.2020, the following order was passed:
“The matter relates to fabrication of No Objection Certificates issued by the Commissioner of Police and other authorities for the purpose of getting license to petroleum and gas outlets from the appropriate companies and the detenu is also one of the persons who was involved in the fabrication of No Objection Certificates. Therefore, this Court has directed the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to find out as to how many persons have used fake No Objection Certificates for obtaining license to their petroleum and gas outlets.
2.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that so far licenses to 91 Petroleum and gas outlets have been issued with fake No Objection Certificates. Mr.G.Karthikeyan, learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for Central Government submitted that report of the fourth respondent will be filed before this Court by way of circulation. However, Mr.Salim, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 10, 11 and 12 submitted that only after furnishing the details of the fake No Objection Certificates and the persons involving in the fabrication of No Objection Certificate, action can be taken against the license holders. Therefore, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor is directed to circulate the report of the fourth respondent to the learned Counsel for the respondents. Even any action has to be taken against the license holders, the same has to be taken as per law. 3.Post the matter for orders.”
5. Later, the proceedings in the habeas corpus petition was closed on 06.09.2021, observing that the detention order has already been set aside by the court on 05.08.2020, and therefore, nothing survives for adjudication.
6. It is a matter of record before us and not disputed that in view of proceedings made and various orders passed by this Court in the Habeas Corpus Petition, referred to as above, the matter had already been taken up, as large number of fake no objection certificates were claimed to have been issued from the office of the Commissioner of Police, Chennai, and the same where being used by various intending dealers/ applicants to obtain explosive license from the competent authorities under the explosive laws.
7. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, lodged an first information report (FIR) during early January, 2020 complaining that large number of fake no objection certificates, in the name of competent authorities who had never issued those no objection certificates, were circulating in the system, so as to provide benefit to the no objection certificate holders to obtain explosive license and establish CNG/ LPG outlets. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that various complaints were lodged in Chennai, Erode and Dindigul Districts leading to registration of FIRs, primarily against those who are alleged to have prepared fake no objection certificates and handed over to the beneficiaries for a hefty sum.
8. The present petitioner submitted a representation to the authorities of the Explosive Department on 24.10.2022, requesting for cancellation of explosive license granted to the petroleum retail outlets in Tamil Nadu, based on forged no objection certificates, giving reference to order dated 01.10.2020, passed by a Division Bench of this Court, in the HCP Nos.565 and 589 of 2020, referred to hereinabove.
8.1. In response thereto, the Joint Chief Controller, Explosives, for Chief Controller of Explosives, New Delhi, vide his memo dated 14.11.2022, requested the Joint Chief Controller of Explosives, Chennai, to refer to the letter dated 24.10.2022, and forward action taken report. Thereafter, according to the petitioner, no information was received as to what action, if any, was taken.
9. In these circumstances, the petitioner filed this petition seeking directions as above.
10. This Court, after having gone through the materials on record and having found that large number of fake no objection certificates were prepared by one set of accused persons, against some of whom, offences have already been registered in various police stations, also required the response of the respondent police authorities and those involved in the process of investigation, as to what investigation has been made to examine the role of those beneficiaries who paid huge amounts, and were acquainted and seeking benefit of a system operated by a racket, preparing and selling forged no objection certificates. In that connection, this Court passed various orders from time to time.
11. The following orders were passed on 11.12.2023, 24.01.2024 and 01.07.2024:
Order dated 11.12.2023:
“Learned Additional Solicitor General submits that the State Government has not yet forwarded the details of the fake No Objection Certificates obtained by the accused persons. He submits that 27 licenses issued on the basis of fake No Objection Certificates have been cancelled.
2.The Assistant Inspector General of Police has filed a status report stating that criminal cases have been filed against ten persons for obtaining 88 fake No Objection Certificates.
3.The details of all the fake No Objection Certificates granted shall be communicated within one week, to the office of the Central Government. The same shall be verified within three weeks thereafter by the Central Government and the action taken shall be placed on record. The respondent State shall also place on record the steps they intend to take to ensure that such fake No Objection Certificates are not issued.
4.List the matter on 24.01.2024.”
Order dated 24.01.2024
“Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, learned Additional Solicitor General appears for Mr.V.T.Balaji, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3, Mr.Vijay Meghanath, learned counsel appears for respondents 4 to 7 and Mr.K.Karthik Jagannath, learned Government Advocate appears for respondents 8 and 9.
On the last date, we have directed the learned Government Advocate to give the details of all the fake No Objection Certificates to the office of the Central Government.
Learned Government Advocate submits that the said details were given to the Central Government. It is further submitted that the Central Government/second respondent has called for the details and the same have been provided by all the oil companies to them.
Learned counsel appearing for the Central Government shall place on record the steps undertaken pursuant to the details received from the State Authorities before next date.
List the matter on 14.03.2024.”
Order dated 01.07.2024.
“The learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submits that he will place a memo with regard to the action taken against the officials, who involved in fabrication of No Objection Certificates arranged so as to operate the outlets.
Post this matter on 01.08.2024 for filing memo.”
12. During the course of hearing this case on 19.09.2025, this Court further noticed that though with judicial intervention, licenses issued based on fake no objection certificates have been cancelled and criminal action has been initiated against those who are involved in preparation of fake no objection certificates, what remains is as to what preventive measures have been taken by the respondents to ensure that in future, forged no objection certificates are not allowed to be used for the purpose of issuance of explosive license. The respondent authorities were directed to come out with an appropriate mechanism. It was observed thus:
“Though, with judicial intervention, the licences issued based on fake No Objection Certificates issued had been cancelled and criminal action has also been initiated against those who are involved in preparation of forged No Objection Certificates, what remains is as to what preventive measures are being taken by the respondents to ensure that in future, forged No Objection Certificates are not allowed to be used for the purpose of issuance of explosive licences.
2.Learned Additional Solicitor General and the learned State Government Pleader, both pray for some time to come out with an appropriate mechanism of verification/autoverification by use of technology to avoid recurrence of such incidents.
List on 07.11.2025.”
13. Again when the case was taken up on 14.11.2025, the other serious matter of concern noticed by this Court was that the information that has so far been divulged to the Court only reveals that criminal cases have been registered against those who are found in preparing and using fake no objection certificates. However, information submitted by the Police Department does not indicate as to whether offence was registered against those who are beneficiaries of such fake no objection certificates and are prima facie conspirators in the commission of offence. The Court passed the following order:
“On the last date of hearing, we had granted time to the learned counsel appearing for the Central and State Governments to come out with a mechanism of verification / auto verification by use of technology to avoid recurrence of such incidents.
2. Today, some more time is sought, and is granted. The above direction should be complied with positively, within a period of four weeks from today.
3. The other serious matter of concern, as raised by the petitioner-in-person, is that the information which has so far been divulged to this court only reveals that criminal cases have been registered against those who are found involved in preparing and using fake NOCs. However, information submitted by the police department does not indicate as to whether offence was registered against those who are beneficiaries of such fake NOCs and are prima facie conspirators in the commission of offence.
4. The information which has been disclosed before this Court shows that approximately 97 fake NOCs have been found and those who are allegedly involved in preparation and use of those NOCs have been proceeded against and offence is registered, and further proceedings towards submission of charge sheet and trial are going on. However, it is not clear whether those, whose names appear as holders of NOCs, were proceeded against or not.
5. Learned State counsel is directed to seek instructions and file a detailed affidavit whether those, persons whose names appear in the fake NOCs, have been made accused or not, and if so, what action has been taken.
6. List on 15.11.2025.
7. On the next date of hearing, the officer in-charge of investigation (Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBCID) in the present case shall also remain present in Court, along with the relevant information and documents.”
14. The State was directed to seek instructions and file a detailed affidavit whether those persons whose names appear in the fake no objection certificates have been made accused or not, and if so, what action has been taken.
15. On 15.12.2025, taking into consideration that the respondent authorities have developed cold feet and are not carrying out fair investigation to examine the role of those who are the actual beneficiaries of the entire mechanism of preparation of fake no objection certificates, this Court observed as below:
“After going through the report submitted by the respondents, prima facie, we are of the view that no fair investigation is being carried out, to save those beneficiaries, who, on the basis of forged NOCs., have obtained licence and running the petrol pump outlets.
2.Before handing over the matter to an independent agency, we give the respondents one last opportunity to come out with a proper report as to what investigation was carried out to enquire into the role of the beneficiaries, who, on the strength of forged NOCs., were granted licence to run the petrol pump outlets.
List this case on 19.01.2026.”
16. The respondent authorities submitted status report regarding the investigation which has so far been carried out. It has been brought on record that as many as four charge-sheets have been filed by the investigating agency. According to the learned State Counsel, though initially, investigation was being carried out by the respective jurisdictional station house officers of the concerned police station, taking into consideration the magnitude of the offence and that the case involved operation of a racket, preparing fake no objection certificates at the instance of the beneficiaries by receiving huge sums, which no objection certificates were being used by those beneficiaries to obtain explosive license and establish and operate petrol pump outlets, and other LPG stations, investigation was handed over to CBCID.
17. At this stage, learned State Counsel would further submit that as a matter of fact, as per the order of the High Court in Crl.O.P.No.3468 of 2021, dated 29.03.2021, filed by K.L.Sivakumar, the said case was transferred to CBCID and was re-registered in CBCID Metro, FIR in Crime No.5/2021 under Sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 472, 471 r/w 34 IPC.
18. Learned State Counsel would further submit that two of the beneficiaries, relating to issuance of no objection certificates in the districts of Dindigul and Erode, have also been arrayed as accused in those cases, taking into consideration the incriminating material, prima facie involving them in the commission of offence. He would submit that two of the beneficiaries/accused of Erode District viz., Sathyaraj and Murugan, have approached this Court by filing criminal original petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and there is a stay operating in their favour.
19. Learned State Counsel would further submit that the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate for exclusive trial of CCB cases (Relating to Cheating Cases in Chennai) and CBCID, Metro Cases, Egmore, Chennai, has passed an order on 20.11.2025 directing further investigation against K.L.Sivakumar. Later on, K.L.Sivakumar had been added as an accused and confessional statement has also been recorded.
20. Learned counsel appearing for private respondents as well as counsel for the proposed applicant would submit that they have not committed any offence and they did not know as to whether no objection certificates which were obtained by the other accused and the certificates handed over to them, were fake. They bona fide believed that these no objection certificates were duly and properly issued by the competent authorities.
21. From the entire materials which have been placed before us, we find that a huge racket was operating in this State. This racket was involved in preparing fake and forged no objection certificates for the purpose of being used for obtaining explosive license. Moreover, the agents of this racket were in contact with various persons who were intending to establish CNG/ LPG/ petrol outlet. When they came into contact with these persons, the material on record as it is, shown to us, shows that the persons who were operating the racket (now involved in the case as accused) were in contact with the beneficiaries and had collected huge money from them. Moreover, it is borne out from records that these fake no objection certificates were handed over by the persons operating the racket to the beneficiaries. The beneficiaries having obtained these no objection certificates directly from the fake no objection certificate operators and used these no objection certificates to obtain explosive license.
22. We find that in this manner, so far, about 90 fake no objection certificate cases have been unearthed during investigation already carried out by the investigating agency. However, what disturbs us is that, while taking action against those who were issuing no objection certificate, the investigating authorities have not conducted proper investigation with regard to the role of those persons, for whose benefit and after taking huge money from them, the entire racket for preparing fake no objection certificate was operating in the State. Bare facts which are revealed from the materials produced before us actually show that these beneficiaries were in direct connect with the fake no objection certificate racket and they were directly meeting them and paying them huge amounts. For illustration, according to the confessional statement of one of the accused Mr.Sivakumar, we find that the beneficiary in that case had paid Rs.3 Lakhs.
23. What prima facie appears is that the beneficiaries were directly contacting these persons to obtain no objection certificate and not that they had submitted application in the Department and were handed over no objection certificate from the office of the police commissioner. This kind of operation by the racketeers was directly for the benefit of those persons who were going to be benefited by getting no objection certificate in their hands by paying huge amount but without making proper application before the Department and to the competent authorities.
24. The contents of no objection certificate are as below:
144. No-objection certificate. –
(1) Where the licensing authority is the Chief Controller or the Controller, as the case may be, an applicant for a new licence other than a licence in Forms III, XI, XVII, XVIII, or XIX shall apply to the District Authority with two copies of the siteplan showing the location of the premises proposed to be licensed for a certificate to the effect that there is no objection, to the applicant receiving a licence for the site proposed and the District Authority shall, if he sees no objection, grant such certificate to the applicant who shall forward it to the licensing authority with his application Form IX.
(2) Every certificate issued by the District Authority under sub-rule (1) shall be accompanied by a copy of the plan of the proposed site duly endorsed by him under his official seal.
(3) The Chief Controller or the Controller as the case may be, may refer an application not accompanied by certificate granted under sub-rule (1) to the District Authority for his observations.
(4) If the District Authority, either on a reference being made to him or otherwise, intimates to the Chief Controller or the Controller as the case may be, that any licence which has been applied for should not, in his opinion, be granted, such licence shall not be issued without the sanction of the Central Government.
(5) The District Authority shall complete his inquiry for issuing NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE (NOC) under sub-rule (1) and shall complete the action for issue or refusal of the NOC, as the case may be, as expeditiously as possible but not later than three months form the date of receipt of application by him.
(6) Where the location of storage of petroleum is within the notified area of a Port or Airport under the control of the state or establishment of Indian Space Research Organisation or Department of Atomic Energy, NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE from the District Authority referred to in sub-rules (1) to (5) shall not be required.
Provided that consent for establishment of petroleum storage from the competent authority of concerned notified area or head of the establishment, as the case may be, is obtained.”
25. The no objection certificate shows as if it has been issued on a spot inspection of the site in respect of which such certificate has been issued.
26. We are at a complete loss as to how such no objection certificate could be issued when no such inspection had ever been conducted by the responsible authorities or their authorised officers. Moreover, the beneficiaries, who are having these no objection certificates in their hands routed through the other accused, had personal knowledge that no inspection of their site had taken place. Therefore, this also raises a serious doubt about the role of the beneficiaries. The beneficiaries thereafter, carried these no objection certificates to obtain explosive license.
27. In this manner, without there being any no objection certificate issued by the competent authority, after conducting an inspection as required under the explosive laws and in conformity with rules contained in Rule 131 of the Petroleum Rules, 2002, large number of explosive licenses were issued, and the beneficiaries, on the basis of these explosive licenses, have established and have been operating various petroleum outlets.
28. We gave the respondent authorities more than one opportunity to come out with a satisfactory response; but till date, no satisfactory response has come, much less fair investigation by the concerned investigating agency.
29. The material which is floating at the surface required much deeper and fair investigation, to examine the role of the beneficiaries for whose benefit the entire system was operating.
30. We have no hesitation in saying that the manner in which the investigation has been held or any further investigation that is going on, is not in proper direction and the investigating agency has registered offences only against those who are involved in preparing fake no objection certificates. Except in Erode and Dindigul districts, in other cases, the role of beneficiaries have not been examined, despite our directions issued from time to time.
31. The power of this Court to direct independent investigation by other agency has been considered by a Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State Of West Bengal & Ors vs Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and others (2010) 3 SCC 571.
Their Lordships in the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as below :
“68 (vii) If in terms of Entry 2 of List II of the Seventh Schedule on the one hand and Entry 2-A and Entry 80 of List I on the other, an investigation by another agency is permissible subject to grant of consent by the State concerned, there is no reason as to why, in an exceptional situation, court would be precluded from exercising the same power which the Union could exercise in terms of the provisions of the Statute. In our opinion, exercise of such power by the constitutional courts would not violate the doctrine of separation of powers. In fact, if in such a situation the court fails to grant relief, it would be failing in its constitutional duty.”
32. Though ordinarily, this Court would be slow in directing handing over of investigation to any other agency, however, in the present case, as our orders would go to show, in the past, despite our repeated orders, the agency is not holding investigation in proper direction and till date, it claims to be clueless and at the same time ignorant of the role played by various persons including the beneficiaries, in the matter. We are therefore constrained to draw an inference that the investigation is not fair and independent. In a situation like this, this Court has ample powers to hand over investigation to some other investigating agency. In the above decision, following observations were made by their Lordships:
“70. Before parting with the case, we deem it necessary to emphasise that despite wide powers conferred by Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, while passing any order, the Courts must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of these Constitutional powers. The very plenitude of the power under the said Articles requires great caution in its exercise. In so far as the question of issuing a direction to the CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned, although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such power should be exercised but time and again it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. This extra-ordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. Otherwise the CBI would be flooded with a large number of cases and with limited resources, may find it difficult to properly investigate even serious cases and in the process lose its credibility and purpose with unsatisfactory investigations.
70.In Secretary, Minor Irrigation & Rural Engineering Services, U.P. & Ors. Vs. Sahngoo Ram Arya & Anr.31, this Court had said that an order directing an enquiry by the CBI should be passed only when the High Court, after considering the material on record, comes to a conclusion that such material does disclose a prima facie case calling for an investigation by the CBI or any other similar agency. We respectfully concur with these observations.”
33. Relying upon the aforesaid dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the law laid down, and applying to the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are inclined to hand over the investigation of this case to the Central Bureau of Investigation(CBI).
34. The Additional Director General of Police, CBCID, shall handover the entire papers relating to investigation conducted so far to the appropriate authority as may be deputed by the Director, CBI, New Delhi.
35. Mr.V.T.Balaji, learned counsel for Union of India, is present in the Court. He is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Director, CBI for taking necessary steps and for conduct of investigation by CBI and submission of further investigation report in the concerned Courts, if any other persons are found to be involved in commission of offence, along with, and in conspiracy with the accused who have already been involved, with those who are alleged to have prepared forged and fake no objection certificates.
36. The writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, WMP Nos.19329 of 2023, 47801 of 2025, 3768 of 2026 are closed.
 |
This Product is Licensed to , |