Dismissed

Mohan Vitthal Kore v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and Ors.

Bombay HC27 Mar 2014WP/908/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected a writ petition seeking consideration of the petitioner's application for a LPG dealer appointment at village Kapshi. The court held that the petitioner's land was in village Balikre. As the advertisement required land at the specific location of Kapshi, the petitioner was not qualified, and the impugned rejection had no error.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mohan Vitthal Kore Vs Hindustan Petroleum… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2014)

wp-908.14

pmw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.908 OF 2014

Mohan Vitthal Kore

... Petitioner

Vs.

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and others ... Respondents

¶10

Mr. Makrand Bakore and Mr. M.J. Patil, for the Petitioner. Mr. Minoo Soodia i/by M/s. Rustamji & Ginwala, for the Respondent No.1.

¶11

Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP, for Respondent No.5.

¶12

CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 27^th MARCH, 2014

¶13

P.C.

¶14

. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. A

¶15

notice was published by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited, the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited and the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited inviting applications for appointing dealers under the Rajiv Gandhi Gramin LPG Vitrak Scheme. The Petitioner applied against the location of village Kapshi. The application of the Petitioner has been rejected on the ground that the Petitioner is not holding a land in the village Kapshi.

¶16

The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the

¶17

1 of 2

¶18

2 wp-908.14

¶19

Petitioner is that the land offered by the Petitioner is in village Balikre and both the villages Balikre and Kapshi are within the jurisdiction of group Gram Panchayat Kapshi /Balikre, Taluka Kagal, District Kolhapur. The submission of the learned counsel is that the land offered by him is very close to village Kapshi. His submission is that he can maintain his office in village Balikre and, therefore, the application of the Petitioner may be ordered to be considered.

¶20

The requirement in the advertisement published by the Petroleum Companies is that the applicant will have to offer a land at advertised location. The advertised location in the present case is revenue village Kapshi. The group Gram Panchayat has jurisdiction over two revenue villages namely Kapshi and Balikre. The fact remains that the land offered by the Petitioner is not situated within the limits of village Kapshi but it is situated within the village Balikre.

¶21

Therefore, the Petitioner was not entitled to apply against the advertised location. Hence, we find no error in the view taken by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited when it was observed that the Petitioner was not qualified. There is no merit in the Petition and the same is rejected.

¶22

2 of 2

Mohan Vitthal Kore v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mohan Vitthal Kore v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Vitthal Ganpat Otari Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Social Welfare and Ors.

Shri. Kerba Rama Patil Vs the Collector and Dy. Director of Rehabilitation, Kolhapur and Ors.

Shri. Babu Raghu Patil Vs the Collector and Dy. Director of Rehabilitation, Kolhapur and Ors.

Shivaji Jagannath Kshirsagar Vs 1. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The State of Maharashtar Vs Anand Balkrishna Kulkarni

Bhimsha Rajba Bharle Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.