Dismissed¶36

Mr Ashok Kumar v. the Government Ofindia

Karnataka HC9 Jan 2025WP/1135/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court 2025 writ petition (GM-RES) dismissed; WP 1135/2020; Ashok Kumar v. Government of India (Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas) and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited; mandamus sought to recall e-mail dated 02.02.2019 (Annexure-C) declaring dealership candidature ineligible; retention in Group 1; dealership subsequently allotted to third party; nothing survives for consideration; petition devoid of merits; filed under Articles 226 and 227, Constitution of India; decided 09 January 2025 by Justice Jyoti Mulimani.

What did the court decide?

Taking note of the subsequent development that the dealership has been allotted to a third party, nothing survives for consideration in the Writ petition. ¶35

Mr Ashok Kumar Vs the Government Ofindia — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:832 WP No. 1135 of 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 1135 OF 2020 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. ASHOK KUMAR S/O MR.VIDYADHAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT SY.NO.27, ALADAHALLI VILLAGE, BIRUR HOBLI, KADUR TALUK, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 129.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. K.A.PRAKASH., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS, SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110 001.

¶13

Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

M/S. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1956, A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT BHARAT BHAVAN, NOS.4 AND 6, CURRIMBHOY ROAD, BALLAD ESTATE, MUMBAI-400 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR (MARKETING).

¶15

M/S. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1956, A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:832 WP No. 1135 of 2020

¶18

HAVING ITS TERRITORY OFFICE AT MANGALORE COASTAL INSTALLATION, NEAR APMC YARD, OFF NH-17, BAIKAMPADI, MANGALORE-577 011. REPRESENTED BY ITS TERRITORY MANAGER (RETAIL).

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT. L.V.APARNA., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. SUYOG HERALE., ADVOCATE R2 & 3)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Smt.L.V.Aparna., counsel for respondent No.1 has

¶25

appeared in person.

¶26

Sri.Suyog Herale., counsel for respondents 2 and 3 has appeared through video conferencing.

¶27

The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to recall the e-mail dated 02.02.2019 vide Annexure-C by retaining the petitioner in Group 1.

¶28

Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers

¶29

with care.

¶30

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC:832 WP No. 1135 of 2020

¶32

Counsel Sri.Suyog Herale., on instruction submits

¶33

that by virtue of e-mail, the petitioner was informed that his candidature was found ineligible. Counsel on instruction further submits that as of today, dealership has been allotted to third party. Counsel, therefore, submits that an appropriate order may be passed.

¶34

The oral submission made by counsel for respondents 2 and 3 is placed on record.

¶35

A perusal of the e-mail reflects that the candidature of the petitioner was found ineligible and the same was informed to him. Taking note of the subsequent development i.e., allotment of dealership to the third party as of today nothing survives for consideration in the Writ petition. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶36

6. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed .

¶37

Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE

¶38

TKN List No.: 3 Sl No.: 29

Mr Ashok Kumar v. the Government Ofindia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Ashok Kumar v. the Government Ofindia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Syed Farooq Vs Sri Syed Sayeed

Sri Siddaramaiah Vs Smt. P.Varalakshmamma

Corporation Bank Officers Organisation Vs the Union of India

Prashanth P N Vs State of Karnataka

The Manager Vs Sri Seshagirinatha Reddy Manyam

Smt N Shobha Vs the Commissioner of Police