Dismissed

Smt. Pushpa Rani v. Union of India and Ors.

Rajasthan HC9 Nov 2017CW/13425/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, an LPG distributor, filed a writ petition challenging the Oil Marketing Companies' decision to appoint new distributors in locations beyond her operating area. The Court held that no interference was warranted as the new locations were outside her prescribed operating zone and dismissed the petition. The stay petition was also dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition and stay petition dismissed.

Smt. Pushpa Rani Vs Union of India and Ors. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13425 / 2017

¶3

Smt. Pushpa Rani, W/o Sh. Krishna Kumar, Aged About 45 Years, B/C Schedule Caste, Proprietor, M/s Lunkaransar Indane Gas Service, Lunkaransar, District Bikaner.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Union of India Through the Secretary, Petrolium and Gas Ministry, Govt. of India, Govt. Secretariat, New Delhi.

¶7

Dy. Secretary, LPG, Petrolium and Gas Ministry, Govt. of India, Govt. Secretariat, New Delhi.

¶8

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., G-9, Ali Yavar Jung Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051.

¶9

I.O.C. Ltd. Indane Area Office, Marketing Division, Sector 12, Chopasani Housing Board, Jodhpur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.D. Vyas

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶13

Judgment / Order

¶14

09/11/2017

¶15

The petitioner is the proprietor of LPG distributorship M/s Lunkaransar Indane Gas Service situated at Lunkaransar, District Bikaner.

¶16

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the advertisement published in daily newspapers dated 23.08.2017 whereby the respective Oil Marketing Companies have invited applications from the eligible persons for appointing as LPG distributors at different locations. The petitioner is being aggrieved with the attempt of the concerned Oil Marketing Company for appointing LPG distributors at location Nos.85, 87,

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[CW-13425/2017]

¶19

201 and 264. It is claimed by the petitioner that the appointment of the new LPG distributors will be adversely affected her business.

¶20

It is noticed that the petitioner has submitted a representation to the Deputy Secretary, LPG, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India on 31.08.2017. The said representation of the petitioner came to be decided by the Deputy General Manager (LPG), Jodhpur area office of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, copy of which is Annexure-6. The same is reproduced hereunder :

¶21

“Ref No : JDAO/LGS/01 date : 05.09.2017

¶22

To,

¶23

Ms Pushparani Proprietor

¶24

M/s Lunkaransar Gas Services Lunkaransar, District : Bikaner

¶25

Dear Madam,

¶26

Sub: Representation to Ministry on advertisement for new LPG distributorship published on 23.08.2017 for Rajasthan

¶27

Kindly refer to your letter ref no NIL dated 31.08.2017 on Proposed New LPG Distributorship in Lunkaransar Block vide advertisement dated 23.08.2017 addressed to Dy. Secretary (LPG) , MOP&NG , Govt. Of India.

¶28

We have sympathetically reviewed your representation and wish to inform you the following :

¶29

Selection of locations for LPG distributorship is done with a larger view of ensuring LPG to every household. The details of locations, referred by you has been considered due to the potential of the location along with the cluster of villages around the location and has been found to be viable for a Gramin Vitrak / Durgam Khetriya Vitrak.

¶30

(3 of 3)

¶31

[CW-13425/2017]

¶32

For your kind information the viability limit of these distributors are taken as under :

¶33

Gramin Vitrak : Refill Ceiling Limit of 5000 nos cylinder per month . For feasibility the refill sale limit is 2500 nos cylinder per month .

¶34

Durgam Khetriya Vitrak : Refill Ceiling Limit 1500 nos cylinder per month . For feasibility the refill sale limit is 600 nos cylinder per month .

¶35

Further , it is to be noted that the approx areal distance of the locations referred by you from the location of your distributorship is as under :

¶36

Lunkaransar – Kaalo = 20.5 km

¶37

Lunkaransar – Peepra = 17.2 km

¶38

Lunkaransar – Kheenyera = 22.1 km

¶39

Hence it is evident that the locations identified are beyond your prescribed Operating Area.”

¶40

Having perused the letter dated 05.09.2017 (Annexure-6), this Court is of the opinion that when the locations for which applications have been invited by the Oil Marketing Companies for appointing LPG distributors are beyond the prescribed operation area of the petitioner, no interference is called for by this Court in this writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed.

¶41

Stay petition also stands dismissed.

¶42

(VIJAY BISHNOI)J.

¶43

Gaurv/28

Smt. Pushpa Rani v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Pushpa Rani v. Union of India 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

Mukesh Vs State

Raj. State Indu. Deve. and Inve. Corp. Ltd. Vs State Industrial and Ors.

Raj. State Indu. Deve. and Inve. Corp. Ltd. Vs State Industrial and Ors.

Rajendra Kumar Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Mohan Lal Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Nathu Lal Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.