Disposed

Smt. Asmita Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC24 Jan 2024WPC/340/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ to direct authorities to decide her representation regarding allotment of Retail Outlet Dealership with Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Court directed respondents No. 3 and 4 to decide the pending representation within 60 days.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents No. 3 and 4 to decide the pending representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law within 60 days.

Smt. Asmita Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPC No. 340 of 2024

¶5

Smt. Asmita Sharma W/o Anurag Sharma Aged About 31 Years R/o Imlibhata, Ward No. 3, Mahasamund, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar,, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Collector,, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

¶10

3. Indian Oil Corporation Limited Indian Oil Bhavan, G-9, All Yavar Jung Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai (Maharastra)- 400051

¶11

4. Indian Oil Corporation Limited Through The Regional Manager, Raipur Division, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Indian Oil Bhawan, Rajeev Gandhi Marg, Vip Road, Telibandha, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

5. Ashish Agrawal S/o Suresh Kumar Agrawal Aged About 34 Years R/o VillageBikapali, Post- Shikaripali, Ps- Tendukona, Tehsil And District- Mahasamund , Cg

¶13

---- Respondents

¶14

(Cause Title is taken from Case Information System)

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr. Shubhank Tiwari, Advocate For State : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. A.G.

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶17

2 5.01.2024

¶18

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):-

¶19

(i) That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions to call for entire records with respect to allotment of Retail Outlet Dealership for Village Khallari, Tehsil Bagbahra, District Mahasamund (C.G)

¶20

(ii) That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions to direct the respondents No. 3 & 4 to take strict actions upon the Grievance/Complaint dated 08.01.2024 filed by the petitioner strictly as per accordance with law and within stipulated period of time.

¶21

(iii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions to direct the respondent authorities to pay the legal cost and expense from the

¶22

¶23

respondent authorities.

¶24

(iv) Any other relief which may be deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be provided in favour of the petitioner.

¶25

2 . Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner applied for allotment of Retail Outlet Dealership in the State of Chhattisgarh for Regular/Rural Outlet Dealerships in Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. He would further submit that respondent No. 5/Ashish Agrawal also applied and was selected and the Retail Outlet has been allotted to him. He would also submit that the petitioner is entitled to be allotted the Retail Outlet, but her claim has not been considered by the Authority/respondents No. 3 & 4. He would also submit that a representation has been made to respondents No. 3 & 4. He would further contend that the grievance redressal system is given in the brochure for the selection of dealers of Regular/Rural Retail Outlets which was issued in the month of June 2023. He would submit that a direction may be issued to the grievance redressal committee to decide her representation.

¶26

3 . On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose and submit that the petitioner has sought relief in the representation to cancel the allotment of Retail Outlet given to respondent No. 5/Ashish Agrawal and to issue L.O.I. in favour of the petitioner. He would further submit that the entire process has already been completed; therefore, the petitioner has no case on merits.

¶27

4 . Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶28

5 . Considering the fact that the limited prayer of the petitioner is for issuance of a direction to respondents No. 3 & 4 to decide her representation, in the opinion of this Court such direction may be issued.

¶29

6 . Taking into consideration the above-stated facts without commenting anything

¶30

¶31

on the merits of the case, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No. 3 and 4 to decide the pending representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶32

7 . With the aforesaid observation(s)/direction(s), this petition is disposed of.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶35

siddhant

Smt. Asmita Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Asmita Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

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

Chhattisarh Rajya Gramin Bank Vs District Magistrate

Mahendra Pal Padwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Manbodh Sahu Vs Sakiruddin

Avinash Tripathi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ku. Sanjita Barman Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Awadhesh Jaiswal Vs State of Chhattisgarh