Disposed

K.Shanmugam v. The Chairman

Madras HC16 Feb 2021WP/3231/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed against Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. challenging an order deeming the petitioner ineligible for a retail outlet. The Court, noting the respondents agree to consider his candidature for Group-3 applicants, disposed of no costs and closed connected petitions.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of. No costs were awarded to any party, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

K.Shanmugam Vs The Chairman — Consumer Protection | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 16.02.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶5

W.P. No.3231 of 2021 and WMP No.3667 of 2021 K.Shanmugam ...Petitioner Vs 1. The Chairman, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., G-9, Indian Oil Bhavan, Aliyavar Jung Marg Bandra East, Mumbai - 400 051. 2. The Executive Director, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Indian Oil Bhavan, No.139, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai -600 034.

¶6

The Administrative Officer, Head of the Divisional Office, Chennai Divisional Office, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., No.500, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 018. ...Respondents

¶7

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the impugned order issued by the 3rd respondent in the Ref. No.15455746899712, dated 05.03.2020 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to award the selection of the R.O. Dealership for location R.K.pet to Pallipattu Road (National Highways, Nellore High Road) in terms the letter dated 31.01.2019. Ref. No.15455746899712 issued by the 3rd respondent.

¶8

For petitioners ... Mr.M.Silambarasan For respondents ... Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali Standing Counsel

¶9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

ORDER

¶11

Mr.Mohammed Faiyaz, learned Standing counsel for the respondents accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶12

By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the time of admission itself.

¶13

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the 3^rd respondent wherein the 3^rd respondent has found the petitioner ineligible for a retail outlet on the ground that during field verification of the credentials of the petitioner, it was found that the petitioner has failed to produce the original land documents for verification and the land documents produced by him was in variance with the documents produced along with the application submitted by the petitioner for retail outlet. However in the same impugned order, the respondent has observed that the candidature of the petitioner may be considered by them for selection along with Group-3 applicants as per the guidelines. The main grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that his representation dated 06.03.2020 requesting the respondents to consider his candidature for selection along with Group-3 applicants has not been considered.

¶14

Heard Mr.M.Silambarasan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali, learned Standing counsel for the respondents.

¶15

Mr.Mohammed Faiyaz, learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that the respondents are willing to consider the petitioner's candidature for selection along with Group-3 applicants as per the guidelines fixed by the respondents oil corporation. For this submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner is satisfied.

¶16

After recording the submissions made by the learned Standing counsels for the respondents that the respondents will consider the petitioner's candidature for selection along with Group 3 applicants as per guidelines, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶17

s/dAssistant Registrar(CS VI)

¶18

True Copy

¶19

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶20

vsi2

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

¶23

The Chairman, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., G-9, Indian Oil Bhavan, Aliyavar Jung Marg Bandra East, Mumbai - 400 051. 2. The Executive Director, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Indian Oil Bhavan, No.139, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai -600 034. 3. The Administrative Officer, Head of the Divisional Office, Chennai Divisional Office, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., No.500, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 018. +1cc to Mr.M.Silambarasan, Advocate, Sr.No.7850 W.P. No.3231 of 2021 and WMP No.3667 of 2021 KV(CO) KKV/10/03/2021

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

K.Shanmugam v. The Chairman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Shanmugam v. The Chairman

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

C.R.Shankar Vs The Thasildar

J.M.Edward Nadars and Company Vs Yes Bank Ltd.

M.Suriyaprakash Vs The Commissioner

R.Murugesan Vs The Sub Collector

Mr.a.Gopinath, Vs The District Collecor

M.Balavenkatesan Vs The Indian Oil Corporation Limited