Writ petition challenging the 45-year age limit for LPG dealership imposed by Indian Oil Corporation Limited as ultra vires Articles 19(1)(g) and 19(6) of the Constitution. Court held setting business criteria is valid policy.
Petition challenged as lacking merit due to valid corporate policy regarding business risks and criteria.
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.
1 WP 9019 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
1 WRIT PETITION NO. 9019 OF 2013
VIJAY @ PAPPUSHET NARAYANDAS RIZWANI VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Shri. Anil H. Kasliwal (Jain), Advocate, for petitioner.
Shri. Alok Sharma, Standing Counsel, for respondent No.2.
Shri. S.D. Kulkarni, Advocate, holding for Shri. Sanket Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent No.3
Shri. Akshay Kulkarni, Advocate, holding for Smt. Anjali Dube, Advocate, for respondent No.4.
Coram: T.V. NALAWADE & SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ.
Date: 2 APRIL 2018
ORDER (Per T.V. Nalawade, J.):
2 WP 9019 of 2013
of India. Further direction is claimed for accepting the application given by the present petitioner for the dealership. Both the sides are heard.
3 WP 9019 of 2013
distributorship is a business. It owes all kinds of risk and there is also competition from the distributors who are working for other Oil Corporations. As it is a business proposition the Corporation is entitled to fix criteria like age limit for getting dealership. The Corporation is entitled to consider the aspects like hectic activity involved in the business and initiative which needs to be shown by the distributor. It is a policy decision of the Corporation and this Court does not find any fault in that policy decision. The Corporation has given different age limit for other categories and that can be seen in the Brochure itself. On the basis of those criteria it can be said that the Corporation has studied the matter and as per the requirements the Corporation has fixed the age limit and other conditions are also prescribed. This Court has no hesitation to hold that the classification done by the Corporation for different categories has a sound basis and it cannot be said that the principle of equality is disturbed by the respondent-Corporation. Further, the dealership will be of the nature of contract and not job opportunity and from that angle also it can be said that it
4 WP 9019 of 2013
is open to the Corporation to come with such conditions. Thus there is no merit in the proceeding and so the petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/- (SUNIL K. KOTWAL, J.) (T.V. NALAWADE, J.)
rsl
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the age limit of 45 years for LPG dealership imposed by Indian Oil Corporation Limited is ultra vires Articles 19(1)(g) and 19(6) of the Constitution.
Whether classification by the Corporation based on health and business requirements violates the principle of equality.
Whether the dealership is a job opportunity or a contract subject to corporate policy.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Vijay @ Pappushet Narayandas Rizwani
Union of India
Indian Oil Corporation Limited
T.V. Nalawade
Sunil K. Kotwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
