Disposed

Bijayeeta Das v. Chairman-Cum-Managi

Orissa HC23 Nov 2021WP(C)/12974/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa allowed the writ petitioner's application to secure LPG distributorship. The court directed the oil company to require the petitioner to purchase adjacent land to create a private approach road to the offered plot, linking it to the existing concrete public road.

What did the court decide?

Directed the oil company to require the petitioner to purchase adjacent land to create an approach road; upon compliance, the distributorship must be awarded.

Bijayeeta Das Vs Chairman-Cum-Managi — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.12974 Of 2014 (Through hybrid mode)

¶3

Smt. Bijayeeta Das …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. D. Mohapatra, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. Chairman-cum-ManagingDirector, Opposite Parties Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.and others

¶7

Mr. R. Pattnaik, Advocate

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA ORDER 23.11.2021

¶9

Order No. 7. 1. Mr. Mohapatra, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner, who wants to be awarded LPG distributorship from the oil company. He submits, under challenge is rejection letter dated 20^th May, 2014. Only difficultly is approach to the plot. His client has entered into agreement with owner of adjacent plot, to carve out private road for access to the concrete road. He submits, in event there is direction from Court for the oil company to accord its approval of private road over adjacent plot, his client will proceed to buy portion of the same in the time to be directed.

¶10

Page 1 of 1

¶11

// 2 //

¶12

2. Mr. Pattnaik, learned advocate appears on behalf of the oil company and draws attention to the rejection letter making it clear that the existing concrete road around 8.5 ft. wide near vicinity of offered land is quite narrow, having sharp turns and curves and not suitable for movement of LPG cylinder carrying truck. He refers to the guidelines disclosed in his client’s counter, which says that the plot of land should be freely accessible to all by motorable road, public or private, connecting to public road.

¶13

3. It appears, the concrete road is a public motorable road. It being narrow and having sharp turns can present difficulty on it being negotiated but same will not render the concrete road as not motorable. So far as private road for approach to the plot is concerned, petitioner says, she will purchase required land. On query from Court, it has been ascertained that the distributorship has not been awarded by reason of interim order passed in the writ petition.

¶14

4. The oil company is directed to require petitioner to purchase requisite portion of adjacent land to create approach road to offered plot from the concrete road. In event petitioner complies with the requirement, the oil company will award it the distributorship, as otherwise the plot is found to be in order.

¶15

Page 2 of 3

¶16

// 3 //

¶17

5. With above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶18

(Arindam Sinha)

¶19

Judge

¶20

Sks

¶21

Page 3 of 3

Bijayeeta Das v. Chairman-Cum-Managi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijayeeta Das v. Chairman-Cum-Managi

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

Pravat Kumar Mallick Vs Surendra Nath Puspalaka

M/S.Ivt Ib Valley Transport, Vlt Vijay Laxmi Pvt. Ltd., Cc Coal Carriers Jv Vs Chairman-Cum-M.D.,Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd.

Sasanka Prasad Panda Vs the State of Odisha

Madanlal Agrawala Vs State

Esskay Machinery P.L Vs Industrial Promotio

Hemanta Ku.Sukla Vs Sr.Divisional Manager,East Coast Rly.