The petitioner challenged the rejection of her LPG distributorship application. The court found she failed to participate in a fresh notification process issued by respondents, dismissing the petition as infructuous.
dismissal of the writ petition and the connected interim applications.
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.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:13353 WP No. 112309 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 112309 OF 2019 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
MINAKSHI W/O. UDAYKUMAR DABHADE, AGED 39 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O: H.NO.493, MALBAG-DABHADE LANE, HUNNARGI VILALGE, TQ: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591215.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI DEEPAK MAGANUR & SRI PRAVEEN KUMAR KULKARNI, ADVOCATES)
AND:
GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A BYAHATTI
(BY SRI C.V. ANGADI, ADVOCATE)
…RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 30.05.2019 BEARING ITS REF.BGM/AO/FVC/hunnargi PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-L; ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION VIDE LETTER DATED 15.07.2019 AT VIDE ANNEXURE-"M".
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner applied for LPG distributorship with the respondents. She has shown that she has the required land in Survey No.161/2 at Hunnargi Village, Nippani Taluk. However, as another candidate also had shown the same land, the candidature of the petitioner as well the other candidate were rejected. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.
Advocate for respondents submit that the petitioner had applied for LPG dealership pursuant to the notification dated 17.08.2017 and no candidates were selected pursuant to the said notification. Hence the respondents issued a fresh notification in the month of May, 2023 and the petitioner has failed to participate in the said proceedings. The same is not disputed by the petitioner.
For that reason, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
In view of disposal of the main petition, I.A.1/2023 do not survive for consideration.
Sd/JUDGE
gab/Ct-mck
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition for quashing the rejection of LPG distributorship application is maintainable when a fresh selection process was initiated.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
MINAKSHI W/O. UDAYKUMAR DABHADE
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED
GIRIJA A BYAHATTI
M.I.Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
