Plea by widow of ex-manager outs secret
NEW DELHI: Judges, especially those in constitutional courts, are bound by oath and an unwritten code of conduct which make it highly unethical for them to have any pecuniary, contractual, business or trade links with the government, private parties, PSUs or companies.However, this didn’t deter Justice (retd) Siddharth Mridul from running an LPG distribution agency through his 16-year tenure as a judge of Delhi high court and Chief Justice of Manipur HC.Mridul, who started practice as an advocate in Delhi HC in 1986, was appointed a judge in the same court in March 2008. He became Manipur HC Chief Justice in October 2023.The distributorship agreement between BPCL and Mridul for the company ‘Kitchen Flame’ was renewed on Aug 25, 1995; Aug 24, 2005; Aug 23, 2010; Aug 25, 2015; May 7, 2025; and on Sep 29 last year (with validity up to Aug 24, 2030). The last agreement (TOI has a copy) displays Mridul’s photograph on a stamp paper and is signed by him for ‘Kitchen Flame’.
Kept Renewing Contract While Holding Office
While constitutional court judges, in keeping with transparency norms, need to declare their shareholdings in companies to avoid conflict of interest, Justice Mridul, who retired as Manipur HC CJ on Nov 21, 2024, appears to have violated the code of ethics by continuing with the LPG distributorship allotted to him in 1984 by Bharat Petroleum. This comes even as judiciary appeared to be bracing for likelihood of Parliament initiating the process for removal of Justice Yashwant Varma, formerly of Delhi HC, over discovery of bags of currency notes from his official bungalow.
Ex-judge ignored all notices sent by BPCL
The “Kitchen Flame” controversy, involving another judge of a constitutional court, can only deepen the embarrassment.The Justice Mridul episode is marked by an interesting irony. While the judge may have issued notices to numerous people, entities and authorities, he ended up being slapped with a notice by BPCL on May 29, where the PSU spoke about a public grievance complaint filed in Dec 2025 against the judge alleging that “you have previously served in the capacity of a judge”.The oil marketing company said that Justice Mridul’s running the gas agency violated the contract and asked him to explain why the distributorship should not be suspended.“It prima facie appears that material facts regarding your full-time engagement in constitutional/judicial office during the subsistence of earlier distributorship agreements, and the manner in which the distributorship was being operated in your absence, were not disclosed to the corporation at any point of time,” BPCL said in its notice and reminded Justice Mridul that it had earlier written him letters on Jan 30 and Feb 26, seeking an explanation over the issue.Referring to the clauses of the distributorship agreement, BPCL stated, “It prima facie appears that taking up and/or continuing judicial employment during the subsistence of the distributorship, without even prior written permission of BPCL, is violative of various clauses of the agreement.”Mridul apparently did not respond to any of the notices sent by BPCL, which on July 6 suspended the LPG distribution dealership of ‘Kitchen Flame’. Two months earlier, Monika Yadav, widow of Deepak Yadav who was managing the LPG distributorship for Justice Mridul’s ‘Kitchen Flame’, had moved Delhi high court seeking a directive to BPCL to decide her application seeking reconstitution of proprietorship of the agency in her favour.The Delhi high court had asked BPCL to decide her application within two months. After BPCL suspended the dealership of Kitchen Flame on July 6, Monika again moved the high court accusing BPCL of contumaciously not deciding her application for reconstitution of ownership of the agency and additionally suspending LPG supply.In her petition, she said, “The petitioner, who has acted in good faith, complied with all requirements, and secured a favourable court order, is now being victimised for reasons entirely attributable to the outgoing proprietor (Justice Mridul) and the BPCL’s own inaction over the years.” Go to Source
