The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a dealership candidature due to a land dimension shortfall. The court held the petitioner was ineligible as he lacked a registered sale-deed on the application date.
Writ petition dismissed as devoid of merit; stay applications also disposed of.
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.
[2023/RJJD/015448]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1463/2020
Salim Ali S/o Shri Gulab Khan, Aged About 43 Years, By CasteMusalman, Resident Of Vpo- Khunkhuna Station, DistrictNagaur (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. DD Chitlangi |
|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. Vinay Kothari |
| Mr. Ayush Goyal | |
| Mr. PradeepSingh |
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
16/05/2023
1. The communication dated 11.12.2019 (Annex.11) issued by the respondent Corporation, rejecting the candidature of the petitioner for allotment of Retail Outlet dealership on the ground of shortage of land may kindly be declared illegal and the same may kindly be quashed and set aside.
2. The respondents may kindly be directed not to reject the petitioner’s candidature for allotment of R.O. on the ground of shortage of land measuring 11 Sq. Meter and they may further be directed to consider that all sale-deeds as per agreement to sale
(2 of 6)
[2023/RJJD/015448]
[CW-1463/2020]
executed on dated 21.3.2017 (Annex.4) for allotment of Retail Outlet dealership to the petitioner at the given location.
[2023/RJJD/015448]
[CW-1463/2020]
(3 of 6)
(4 of 6)
[2023/RJJD/015448]
[CW-1463/2020]
Committee (LEC) shall visit the site offered by the petitioner on 08.2.2020 and the petitioner was advised to remain present on that day, however, the respondent authorities came at the site in the month of December, 2019 and inspected the site as per their convenience.
(5 of 6)
[2023/RJJD/015448]
[CW-1463/2020]
as the evaluation of land by the Land Evaluation Committee was scheduled for 08.2.2020. The petitioner against the said date for LEC wrote to the respondent-Corporation that since he would not be available on the said date as he has some urgent personal work, therefore, the land evaluation may be conducted at an earlier date. In lieu of the said request of the petitioner, the respondent Corporation’s LEC conducted land evaluation on 16.11.2019, which was admittedly counter-signed by the petitioner.
[2023/RJJD/015448]
[CW-1463/2020]
(6 of 6)
required to have a registered sale-deed/ registered gift-deed as laid down in the guidelines. However, the petitioner was having an agreement to sale and registered sale-deeds but the agreement to sale, though in existence, was just a land agreement and was not registered on the date of filing of the application i.e. on 11.1.19. Therefore, it is quite clear that the petitioner was not having the eligibility on 11.1.19 and, thus, the petition being devoid of merit is dismissed.
(DR.NUPUR BHATI),J
120-Sanjay/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner was eligible for allotment of a retail outlet dealership given a shortfall in land dimension and the absence of a registered sale-deed on the date of the online application.
Salim Ali
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited
Nupur Bhati
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
