Allowed

Pradeep Kumar Yadav v. the Indian Oil Corporation Limited and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2019WRIC/11068/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking quashing of an order downgrading the petitioner from Group 1 to Group 3 for petrol pump dealership, the High Court allowed the petition after finding corrected documents submitted within time. The Court set aside the rigid stand of the respondent.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 23.3.2019 was set aside, and the matter remanded to the respondent for re-examination and a fresh order within one month.

Pradeep Kumar Yadav Vs the Indian Oil Corporation… — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11068 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Yadav Respondent :- The Indian Oil Corporation Limited And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shashank Maurya,Panchu Ram Maurya Counsel for Respondent :- Archana Singh

¶4

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri P.R.Maurya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶6

The petitioner through this writ petition is seeking quashing of the order dated 23.3.2019 whereby the petitioner has been placed in the category of Group 3 instead of Group 1 for the purpose of allotment of rural retail outlet dealership of petrol pump.

¶7

The reason for change of group given in the impugned order is that certain documents/corrected documents regarding offered land which were required along with the form have not been submitted by the petitioner within the stipulated time.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the on line form Plot no. 291 had been mentioned in place of Plot no.271 which was later on corrected by moving an application for Titimma. He further submits that the corrected documents as required by the respondent no.3 have been submitted by the petitioner within the stipulated time. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent submits that once on line form has been filled disclosing Plot No.291 as offered land the same cannot be changed subsequently.

¶9

We are of the view that once the registered lease deed in respect of plot no. 271, which was inadvertently typed as Plot no.291 in place of Plot No. 271, had been corrected by making an application for titimma after filling the on line form and corrected documents as required by the respondent no.3 have been submitted by the petitioner within the stipulated time, the same should be accepted.

¶10

In our opinion when the corrected documents as required by the respondent no.3 have been submitted by the petitioner the respondent cannnot adopt a very rigid and inflexible stand that plot number cannot be changed after filing of the on line form.

¶11

We, therefore, set aside the order dated 23.3.2019 and remit the matter to the respondent no.3, Divisional Manager, Indian Oil

¶12

Corporation Ltd. N.H.31, Babatpur Road, P.O. Harhua, Varanasi, who shall re-examine the matter of the petitioner regarding change of category of Group for the purpose of allotment of rural retail outlet dealership of petrol pump, in the light of the observations made above and pass a fresh order within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶13

With the aforesaid observations the writ petition is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 17.4.2019 samz

Pradeep Kumar Yadav v. the Indian Oil Corporation Limited and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Kumar Yadav v. the Indian Oil Corporation Limited and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Ose Infrastructure Limited Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Devendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 others

Shri Shahzad Khan Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Sadhana Goel Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sapna Bansala Vs Director Bhutatwa Evam Khanikarm Nideshalaya and 2 Others

Istiyaque Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others