Dismissed

Pooanm Devi v. Senior Regional Manager,Lpg Ar

Patna HC22 Jun 2018CWJC/17136/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the cancellation of her LPG dealership selection. Absent on behalf of the petitioner, the court relied on the respondent-corporation's stand that the petitioner was ineligible for the advertised village location and dismissed the writ petition as devoid of merit.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed. No direction to restore selection.

Pooanm Devi Vs Senior Regional Manager,Lpg Ar — Patna HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17136 of 2010

¶3

=========================================================== Poonam Devi W/o Rajnath Ram residing at the Village - Selaur, P.O.+P.S.Guthani, District- Siwan (Bihar)

¶4

.... .... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Senior Regional Manager, Patna L.P.G. Area Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Bhawan, 6th Floor, Post Box No.-40, Dak Bangla Chauk, Patna (Bihar)

¶7

Area Sales Manager, Patna L.P.G. Area 6th Floor, Post Box No. - 40, Dak Bangala, Patna

¶8

.... .... Respondents

¶9

=========================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner : None

¶11

For Respondent-Corporation: Mr. Rabindra Nath Kanth, Advocate

¶12

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 22-06-2018

¶13

The present writ petition has been filed challenging the

¶14

letter dated 18.08.2010 issued by the respondent No. 4 by which her selection for dealership of an LPG outlet to the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited has been cancelled and seeking a direction to the respondents for restoring her selection for dealership of above named LPG Company.

¶15

None appears on behalf of the petitioner despite repeated calls.

¶16

Learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation appears and opposes the writ petition. Referring to paragraph 10 of the counter affidavit it is submitted that the petitioner’s claim could not be maintained as she was a resident of village Selaur Guthani whereas the

¶17

Patna High Court CWJC No.17136 of 2010 dt.22-06-2018

¶18

2/2

¶19

advertisement was for village Guthani. The letter dated 07.01.2010 was accordingly issued by the respondent-Corporation regarding her ineligibility pursuant to which the petitioner submitted her representation dated 27.01.2010 once again asserting that she was a resident of village Selaur, Panchayat Guthani East which was also confirmed in the field verification and it was observed that village Selaur is not the advertised location and hence the petitioner was found ineligible for consideration for award of the said RGGLV.

¶20

Having regard to the stand of the respondentCorporation in the counter affidavit which has not been controverted as no rejoinder thereto has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, accordingly, the writ petition devoid of merit stands dismissed.

¶21

(Vikash Jain, J)

¶22

B.T/Chandran

¶23

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	N.A.
Uploading Date	26.06.2018
Transmission Date	N.A.

Pooanm Devi v. Senior Regional Manager,Lpg Ar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pooanm Devi v. Senior Regional Manager,Lpg Ar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Ashish Ram Vs The Assistant General Manager, N a B a R D and Ors.

Smt. Durga Devi Vs The Assisitant General Manager, N a B a R D and Ors.

Yuvraj Bhagat Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

India Power Corporation Bodhgaya Ltd. and Ors. Vs South Bihar Power Distribution Co. Ltd. and Ors.

Vikramshila Transformers Pvt.L Vs the Bihar State Electricity Bo

Vibha Kumari Vs the Union of India and Ors.