In a dispute over sealing of an LPG distributorship, this Division Bench allowed the State Oil Company to cancel an applicant's candidature due to a misstatement of bank account type and balance, disallowing the argument of bonafide error.
The appeal is dismissed. The order rejecting the petitioner's candidature is upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
O R D E R
D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (W) NO.1461/2014
Jitendra Choudhary Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
DATE OF ORDER :: 12.2.2015
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR
Mr. Rajesh Shah, for the appellant Mr. Sunil Beniwal, for the respondents no.2 to 4
To question correctness of the judgment dated 22.9.2014 passed by learned Single Bench in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6355/2014 this appeal is preferred.
The facts necessary to be noticed for adjudication of the appeal are that that pursuant to advertisement of the respondents dated 21.09.2013 for LPG distributorship at various places in State of Rajasthan, the petitioner offered his candidature for Shahpura, District Bhilwara, as an OBC candidate. After scrutiny of the application, petitioner's name figured amongst the list of the 16 eligible candidates at Serial No.14, which was published on 21.01.2014. Thereafter, proceedings of the draw for selection by lottery were undertaken on 13.02.2014 and petitioner was declared selected. A communication to this effect was addressed to the petitioner by the respondents. On completion of draw by lots,
2
respondents made endeavour to verify the entries about bank accounts, details of which were furnished by the petitioner in the application form. In this connection, a letter dated 04.03.2014 is addressed to the concerned Branch of Bank of Baroda, whereupon Bank divulged the requisite information to the respondent vide its letter dated 05.03.2014. The bank in its communication clarified the true status of Bank Accounts of Laxman Jat in the following manner:
“श� लक�ण ज�ट क� ह��र� श�ख� �� न�म � ख�त� ह� व द����क 20.10.13 क� न�म� ज�� श�ष ह�:
10230200000350 ज�� श�ष र 1026363/10230100004494 ज�� श�ष र 9656. 50
उक ख�त� ज�� ख�त� ह� व 102302/350 च�ल" ख�त� ह� व 102301/4494 बचत ज�� ख�त� ह� उक ख�त$ स� ज��कत�& अप�� प"र� ज�� र�शश आहररत कर सकत� ह�।"
Taking cognizance of the information received from the Bank, respondents by the order impugned rejected the candidature of the petitioner while assigning the reason that information provided in application were found in variance during the field verification.
The writ petition giving challenge to the decision of the respondent-Oil Company came to be dismissed by the judgment impugned by arriving at the conclusion that while issuing impugned communication, the respondents have not acted arbitrarily, and rather decision detriment to the petitioner has been arrived at on proper scrutiny of the recitals contained in the application during
3
field verification. The complaint of the petitioner about violation of principles of natural justice is also not all tenable for the reason that the facts are admitted or indisputably speaking for themselves.
In appeal, the only argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is that the instant one is not a case of misleading the respondents but of a bonafide error, that deserves to be condoned. It is stated that the applicant instead of his saving bank account gave reference of current account. This error could have not been treated as the reason sufficient to cancel selection of the petitioner as distributor for Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG).
We do not find any merit in the argument advanced.
Clause 11 of the prescribed application for LPG Distributorship refers saving bank account in scheduled bank/ post-office in the name of the applicant. The petitioner instead of giving reference of saving bank account gave a reference of current bank account. It is also pertinent to notice that as per the note given below to Clause 11, the amount declared in each case must be available as closing balance on the last date for submission of application as specified in the advertisement or corrigendum (if any).
As per the respondents, the amount declared was also not available as closing balance on the last date for submission of application. Besides that, the declaration made by the applicant
4
that he is aware that the eligibility for LPG distributorship will be decided based on the information given in the application and the Oil Company on verification found that the information given is incorrect/false/misrepresented, then his candidature may be cancelled in addition to the statement on oath while submitting application for being LPG distributor that if any information/ declaration given by me in my application or in any document submitted by me in support of application for the award of LPG Distributorship or in this affidavit shall be found to be untrue or incorrect or false, the Indian Oil Corporation/ Bharat Petroleum Corporation/ Hindustan Petroleum Corporation would be within its right to withdraw the letter of intent / terminate the distributorship (if already appointed) and that he would have no claim, whatsoever against the Corporation for such withdrawal/ termination make him disentitle for claiming any relief as prayed due to submission of a wrong fact.
Admittedly, the information furnished by the applicant was not correct, as such, on the basis of factual mis-statement the petroleum company is well within its authority to cancel the allotment. In view of it, we do not find any just reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Bench. The appeal is dismissed accordingly.
[JAISHREE THAKUR], J. [GOVIND MATHUR], J.
Sanjay
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere when an LPG distributor candidate was rejected due to a bonafide error in providing a current account balance instead of a saving account balance.
Whether the cancellation of candidature due to incorrect bank account details constitutes a violation of principles of natural justice.
Jitendra Choudhary
Union of India
GOVIND MATHUR
JAISHREE THAKUR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
