According to the petitioner, after the Supreme Court judgment in Satish Sharma case, it was established that the government has no absolute power of distributing government largesse or public resources in any manner it likes. The Government of India framed guidelines for distribution of petroleum products' dealerships which were accepted by the Apex court.

It said according to guidelines, a three-member DSB was to be established having a retired High Court judge as its chairman for a term not exceeding two years.

The petitioner stated that T U Mehta, former Chief Justice of HimachalPradesh High Court, was appointed the DSB chairman of Ahmedabad on October 14, 1998. However, in February 1999, while a meeting of the DSB was on, secretary of the Petroleum Ministry called up the chairman saying that "the Minister wanted one of the applicants named by him to be favoured with the award", the petition said.

It further said that in the past also some other secretaries of the same minister had conveyed similar recommendations. At that time, the chairman had expressed his inability to oblige the Minister. This time, Mehta told the secretary in presence of all in the meeting that he would not be a party to such pressures and would like to resign if the Minister so wished, it said.

Thereafter, according to the petitioner, the government issued a memorandum terminating him and appointed Mehta.

Counsel Girish Patel with Shalin Mehta, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, challenged the order of Government of India on the ground that the termination order was absolutely mala fide.

Theysubmitted that the only reason for termination is that the chairman was not ready to compromise with his honesty and integrity. He was also not ready to accept the recommendation of the Minister which was nothing but nepotism and corruption, they said.

They further submitted that instead of correcting its ways, the government came out with the termination which was against public interest. The order also casts a stigma upon the chairman who is a retired Chief Justice, they said.

They said if such actions are permitted to go on with immunity, no High Court Judge or any person of eminence would like to accept any post of public responsibility.

The petitioner has prayed for cancellation of the order, reinstatement of Mehta if he consents, a detailed investigation in the matter, initiation of criminal proceedings against the Minister and submission of a report to the court.

The next hearing is on June 14.