Disposed

Shivendra Kumar Singh v. The Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Patna HC14 Aug 2012CWJC/14687/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged non-selection for dealership and award to another candidate. As objection was pending with authorities, writ disposed of with direction to consider objection ASAP. No substantive decision on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to officials of the Corporation to consider the petitioner's objection as early as possible and communicate the decision.

Shivendra Kumar Singh Vs The Indian Oil Corporation… — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14687 of 2012

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Shivendra Kumar Singh, son of Shri Yogendra Prasad Singh, Resident of Village + P.O.-Mango Bandar, P.S.-Khaira, District-Jamui

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Indian Oil Bhavan No.2, Dariyaghat, Road, Dhakuria, Kolkata-700068 (West Bengal), through its General Manager.

¶8

The General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Indian Oil Bhawan No.-2 Dariyaghat Road, Dhakuria, Kolkata-700068 (West Bengal).

¶9

The Indian Oil Corporation Limited (M.D.) Begusarai Divisional Officer, P.O.-Barauni, Oil Refinery District Begusarai.

¶10

The S.D.R.S.M., Begusarai, Divisional Office, P.O.-Barauni, Oil Refinery District-Begusarai.

¶11

The Arti Kumari, w/o Rupesh, Resident of Village-New Bihari, P.O.+P.S.+District-Jamui.

¶12

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amrendra Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Adv. and Mr.Mritunjay Kumar, Adv.

¶13

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 14-08-2012 By Annexure-1, the Indian Oil Corporation has informed the petitioner that the DD along with his application for award of dealership was not at par and due to it his application was found ineligible. Accordingly, he was not being called for interview.

¶15

From Annexure-3 dated 10.07.2012 it appears that petitioner has already filed his objection through his learned counsel before the authorities of the Corporation.

¶16

Learned counsel submits that the same has not yet been

¶17

Patna High Court CWJC No.14687 of 2012 (2) dt.14-08-2012

¶18

2 / 2

¶19

considered and disposed of by the authorities of the Corporation. He also submits that in this application he has also raised objection that the respondent no.5, who has now been awarded the dealership, does not have the land in the prescribed limit.

¶20

Since the petitioner has filed his objection against the cancellation of his candidature and has also raised objection in respect of award of dealership to respondent no.5, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the officials of the Corporation to consider the objection as early as possible and communicate the petitioner with regard to their decision in the matter.

¶21

(Jayanandan Singh, J)

¶22

Arvind/-

Shivendra Kumar Singh v. The Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivendra Kumar Singh v. The Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

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

Dilip Kumar @ Dilip Kumar Choudhary Vs The Chairman And Managing Director and Ors.

Md. Mobarak Hussain Ansari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Gulli Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Arun Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

M/s La-elixir Aashiyan Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.