This court directed the respondent H.P.C.L. to investigate the petitioner's grievance regarding the allotment of marks in the dealership selection process and pass a reasoned order within four weeks.
Directed respondent to pass a reasoned order within four weeks and communicate it to the petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
wp3846-11.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.3846/2011
Sandip S/o Madansing Rathod Age 24 years, Occ-Business & Agril R/o Lonje, Tq. Chalisgaon, Dist.Jalgaon.
.. Petitioner
Versus
2
wp3846-11.odt
Near Town Hall, Chalisgaon, Tq.Chalisgaon, Dist.Jalgaon.
.. Respondents
Mr.Vivek J. Dhage,Adv.for petitioner. Mr.Alok Sharma,Standing Counsel for respondent no.1 Smt.Anjali Dubey,Adv.for R.2 and 3. Mr.R.M.Deshmukh,Adv.for R.4.
CORAM : NARESH H.PATIL AND T.V.NALAWADE, JJ.
DATE : 28th NOVEMBER, 2011
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1] Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of
parties, petition is heard finally.
2] The petitioner participated in the selection process for
appointment of dealership of petrol/diesel retail outlets for the location near Ranjangaon, Tq. Chalisgaon, Dist.Jalgaon. The petitioner claims to be a second empaneled candidates and
3 wp3846-11.odt
respondent no.4 Anirudha S/o Vinay Deshmukh is the first empaneled candidate. The petitioner raised grievance in respect of allotment of marks. Consequent thereto, a representation/complaint was addressed to Grievance Cell. By communication dated 15/2/2011, the Senior Regional ManagerRetail, H.P.C.L. Mumbai, intimated the petitioner that the grievances were looked into and the complaint was treated as closed.
3] Consequent to the notice issued, respondent no.4 has filed reply. The counsel for respondent no.4 submits that the corporation has issued Letter of Intent to the respondent no.4 on 21/9/2011 and due to pendency of this Writ Petition, they are facing difficulties in opening the outlet.
4] The learned counsel appearing for the H.P.C.L. submits that the grievance of the petitioner as reflected in the complaint would be looked into afresh and after hearing the necessary/concerned parties, the H.P.C.L. will verify the record and appropriate
4 wp3846-11.odt
reasoned order will be passed at the earliest.
5] Without going into merits of the claims of the contesting parties, we direct the respondent Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, to pass a brief reasoned order within four weeks and communicate the same to the petitioner. Petition is disposed of. Rule is made absolute in above terms.
(T.V.NALAWADE, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL,J.)
umg/wp3846-11
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the H.P.C.L. should clarify its selection process and allotment of marks before appointing the dealership.
Sandip
The Union of India
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation
The Selection Committee
Anirudha
NARESH H.PATIL
T.V.NALAWADE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
