Shailendra Kumar vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shailendra Kumar vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission to the petitioner to file a detailed representation under Clause 18 of the Brochure for Selection of Dealers for Regular & Rural Retail Outlets, June 2023 within three weeks, ignoring the prescribed limitation; respondent no.4 to decide it strictly in accordance with law after due notice and opportunity of hearing to respondent no.5 within one month thereafter.

Issue for consideration

Whether the letter of intent issued by respondent no.4 in favour of respondent no.5 for establishment of a retail outlet on land claimed to be co-owned by the petitioner, without obtaining his consent, is valid. +1 more

Court's answer

The dispute involves disputed questions of fact, inasmuch as the petitioner states he is co-owner of the land offered for the retail outlet without his consent; the Court therefore did not adjudicate the rival factual claims in exercise of writ jurisdiction.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is permitted to file a detailed representation in accordance with Clause 18 of the Brochure for Selection of Dealers for Regular & Rural Retail Outlets, June 2023, ignoring the period of limitation prescribed therein, within three weeks from the date of the order.

Key takeaways

If such a representation is filed, respondent no.4 (Divisional Retail Sales Head, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Prayagraj Divisional Office) shall consider and decide it strictly in accordance with law after giving due notice and opportunity of hearing to respondent no.5, within one month thereafter.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WRIT - C No. 41772 of 2025 (Allahabad High Court, Division Bench of Saral Srivastava and Sudhanshu Chauhan, JJ.; decided November 26, 2025): Petitioner, claiming to be co-owner of land offered by respondent no.5 for a retail outlet, challenged the letter of intent issued by respondent no.4 (Divisional Retail Sales Head, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Prayagraj) without his consent; a suit for partition was stated to be pending. Holding that the matter involved disputed questions of fact, the Court disposed of the writ petition by permitting the petitioner to file a detailed representation under Clause 18 of the Brochure for Selection of Dealers for Regular & Rural Retail Outlets, June 2023 within three weeks, ignoring the prescribed limitation period, with a direction to respondent no.4 to decide it strictly in accordance with law after due notice and opportunity of hearing to respondent no.5 within one month thereafter.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - C No. - 41772 of 2025

Shailendra Kumar

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Indian Oil Corporation Limited And 4 Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Gaurav Gautam, Srishti Singh	Sanjay	Sachdeva,
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C., Rituraj Singh

Court No. - 40

HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Rituraj Singh, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 4.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is co-owner of the land which has been offered by the respondent no.5 for establishment of a retail outlet and since the petitioner consent has not been obtained before issuing the letter of intent by the respondent no.4 in favour of respondent no.5 in respect of the land in question. Hence, the Petrol Pump cannot be established on the land in question.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a suit for partition is also pending and thus the letter of intent granted to respondent no.5 is illegal.

Sri Rituraj Singh, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 4 states that the petitioner has a remedy of filing representation before respondent no.4 under Clause 18 of the Brochure for Selection of Dealers for Regular & Rural Retail Outlets , June 2023. However he submits that the time for filing the representation is 30 days from the date of draw of lot and since the period prescribed under the brochure expired therefore, the representation of the petitioner cannot be entertained by the respondent no.4.

Be that as it may, the dispute involves disputed questions of fact inasmuch as the petitioner states that he is the co-owner of the land in question and

WRIC No. 41772 of 2025

2

without his consent the land has been offered for the establishment of a retail outlet.

In such view of the fact, this Court finds that it would be appropriate in the facts of the present case to permit the petitioner to file a detailed representation in accordance with Clause 18 of the Brochure for Selection of Dealers for Regular & Rural Retail Outlets , June 2023 ignoring the period of limitation prescribed for filing the complaint within a period from three weeks from today. In case, any such representation is filed, respondent no.4The Divisional Retails Sales Head, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Prayagraj Divisional Office, 5th Floor, Indira Bhawan, Civil Lines, Prayagraj, U.P.211001 shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law after giving due notice and opportunity of hearing to the respondent no.5 within a period of one month thereafter.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of .

November 26, 2025 Gaurav

(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad