Partly allowed

Sarawan Kumar Singh v. Union of India and 2 Others

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2020WRIC/10493/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged order denying petrol pump license license appeal filed by allowing petitioner to exhaust alternative remedy of representation before territorial manager within four weeks

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to file comprehensive representation before respondent No.3 within four weeks along with order and demand draft of Rs.5000/-

Sarawan Kumar Singh Vs Union of India and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10493 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Sarawan Kumar Singh Respondent :- Union Of India And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ten Singh,Sher Singh Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Manoj Kumar Singh,Vikas Budhwar

¶4

Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri Vikas Budhwar, learned counsel for the Bharat Petroleum/respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶6

The petitioner has approached this Court invoking extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the letter/order dated 27.01.2020 issued by the respondent No.3 namely Territory Manager (Retail) Varanasi, Retail Territory Office, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited with a further prayer to issue writ of mandamus directing the aforesaid respondent to allot the petitioner license of petrol pump for retail outlet dealership for the location between kilometer stone 23 and 28 of State Highway 74 of District Mirzapur under open category in compliance of the allotment letter dated 22.06.2019.

¶7

Facts as narrated in the writ petition are that respondent-corporation issued an advertisement on 25.11.2018 for selection and appointment of retail outlet dealership in the state of U.P. The petitioner submitted his application form for the allotment of the retail outlet dealership for the location in question under open category. The draw of the aforesaid location in question was held on 21.06.2019. In the said draw, the petitioner was selected. Subsequently vide letter dated 22.06.2019 the petitioner was directed to deposit online a sum of Rs.50,000/- as initial security deposit and to submit all the documents as specified in the letter itself within 10 days for process the application of the petitioner for the allotment of the retail outlet dealership. The petitioner duly deposited the aforesaid amount as well as relevant papers. The documents submitted by the petitioner was duly evaluated by Land Management Committee

¶8

on 05.08.2019 and the Land Management Committee found that the dimension of the land offered by the petitioner was not as per requirement since the land offered by the petitioner was found to be having maximum depth of 34 meters only. Accordingly, the land offered by the petitioner was not found to be meeting minimum dimension criteria. In view of the same, the application form submitted by the petitioner was shifted from group one category to group three category. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order dated 27.01.2020, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

¶9

Sri Vikas Budhwar raised a preliminary objection that statutory remedy is available to the petitioner as provided under Clause 18 of the Brochure issued by the Oil Companies namely "Brochure for Selection of Dealers for Regular and Rural Outlets" published on 24th November, 2018. Clause 18 of the aforesaid brochure deals with the grievance redressal forum, according to which a complaint would be submitted before the authorities.

¶10

Relevant portion Clause 18 of the brochure is reproduced below:-

¶11

"Any complaint should be accompanied by a fee of Rs. 5000/-, only in the form of demand draft of schedule bank, in favour of the Oil Company. Any complaint received without this fee will not be entertained. The complaint received against the selection including eligibility will be disposed off as under:-

¶12

(i) Complaints received before or after draw of lots/bidding process along with requisite fee of Rs. 5000/-, will be kept in record and investigation carried out after 30 days of Draw of Lots/bidding process only in following cases:-

¶13

General complaints with verifiable facts

¶14

Complaints against selected candidate

¶15

(ii) Any complaint received after 30 days from the date of draw of lots/bidding process will not be entertained. (iii) Representation from applicants against rejection of his/her candidature will be verified and disposed of immediately by the Divisional/Regional Head/Territory Manager before proceeding to next stage. For such cases, fee of Rs.5000/- will not be applicable."

¶16

In view of the same it is argued by Sri Vikas Budhwar that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be dismissed on the ground of availability of

¶17

statutory alternative remedy.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the parties and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of finally at the admission stage itself.

¶19

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of finally permitting the petitioner to make a comprehensive representation ventilating all his grievances before the respondent No.3 namely Territory Manager (Retail) Varanasi, Retail Territory Office, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited along with the copy of the order dated 27.01.2020 and a bank draft of Rs.5000/- as provided under Clause 18 of the Brochure within a period of four weeks from today. If such a representation is filed along with certified copy of this order, the respondent No.3 is directed to pass appropriate orders on the same expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of representation before him.The respondent corporation will not reject the complaint/representation only on account of delay and decide the same on merits by passing a speaking and reasoned order.

¶20

Order Date :- 13.7.2020 saqlain

Sarawan Kumar Singh v. Union of India and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarawan Kumar Singh v. Union of India and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Balak Ram and Another Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Ramveer Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Asif Enterprises Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Akanksha Kushwaha and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd Anas Vs Union of India and 2 Others