Disposed

Dontha Kiran Kumar v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited

Telangana HC5 Aug 2025WP/34639/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging allotment of an IOC petrol pump dealership on grounds that respondent No.2 selected respondent No.3 without verifying a registered lease deed and despite a legal notice, allegedly contrary to Clause 23(f) of the dealership selection guidelines. The writ petition was disposed of with consent, permitting the petitioner to apply in future notifications and directing respondents to consciously consider his candidature if otherwise eligible.

What the court decided

AI extract

Dontha Kiran Kumar Vs Indian Oil… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

[^325s1

¶3

IN THE HIGH^{COURTFORTHE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶4

(SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

TUESDAY, THE FIFTH^{DAY OF AUGUST} TWO THOUSAND AND^TWENTYFIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR}

¶8

WRIT PETITION^{NO:3 4639 0F 2024}

¶9

Between:

¶10

DonthaKiranKumar,s/o:NarsaiahDontha'Agedabout2Syears' 6il, i]rtin".",^{ruo ii.irro.i-70,itir<yit village. LuxettifiettVlandal. lt/ancherial} District.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

1 lndian Oil Corporation^{Limited' rep. by Chairman, havlng its.head office at} iili; oii ehr'uan, G-9,^{Ali YavarJungBandra (East),lvlumbai}

¶14

2 The Divisional Officer,^{lndian Oil} Qorporation^{Limited,Warangal-Divistonal} ofi; H.N;.;-r^{r-soiana 504, 4h fioor, Kandakatla.Gatewav KUC Cross} XJial, rliv""t irigiiHinrrrkoinda,^{Hanumakonda District'T S.}

¶15

a tr,4amidi Ravinder,^{S/o: Chandraiah, aged about 29 years, Occ- Business'} iVo n.f.ro.a-zg,^{Donoor, Dharmapuri Mandal' Jagtial District'}

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petitiorr under Article^{226 of the constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances^{stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue an appropriate^{Writ, Order or Direction' more particularlyone in} the nature of^{Writ of Mandamus, to declarethe actionof the 2ndrespondentin} selectingthe3rdrespondentforestablishmentoftheloCPetrolpumpwithout properly verifying the registerJd^{Lease Deed presented by him and inspite of the} legal notice dt.^{25-4.2024illegal, arbitrary,unconstitutional and contrary to Cl. 23} (f) of the guidelines^{issued by the respondent No 1 and 2 and consequently direct} the 2nd respondent^{to conduct enquirywithregard to lease deed presented by the} 3rd respondent^{hereinand declare him as disqualified and to issue Letter of lntent} in favour of the^{petitioner herein.}

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶19

Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay of further proceedings including the issuance of Lol in favour of the 3rd respondent herein, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S. PRASAD BABU

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES (sc FoR tocL)

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI S.V. RAMANA

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

---/

¶25

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE N'V'SHRAVAN KUMAR}

¶26

WRIT PETITI^{ON No.3 4639 of2O24}

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This Writ Petition^{isfiled questioning the actionof} respondent^{No.2 in selecting respondentNo'3 for establishment} of IOC Petrol^{PumP without} properly verifying^{the registered} and inspite^{of the lega1 notice} Lease Deed Presented^{bY him} dated 25.04.2024^{as illegal,} arbitrary, unconstitutional^and contrary to^{Clamse 23(f) of the guidelinesissued by respondent} Nos. 1 and 2.^{A consequential prayer ismade todirect} respondent No.2^{to conduct enquirywith regard to lease deed} presented by respondent^{No'3 and declare him as disqualified} and to issue^{Letter of Intent (for short "LOI") in favor of the} petitioner.

¶29

2.HeardSriS.PrasadBabu,learnedcounselappearingfor the petitioner,^{Sri DominicFernandes,learned Standing Counsel} for Indian Oil Corporation^{Limitedappearingfor respondent} Nos.l and 2^{and SriS.V'Ramana,learned counselfor} respondent^No.3.

¶30

Learned counsel^{for the petitioner after arguing at length} fairly submits^{subsequentto the issuance ofLOI tothe} respondent No.3^{on 27 .t2.2O23and after going throughthe}

Grieva,ce Redressal Systerrr, as per the . dcaiership selection guiidelines, the petitioner fileci this present writ petition. It is further subn-ritted that the petitioner is now interested to furt,er pursue in the forthcoming r_.otifications emci also interested in running the deaierships.

¶35

In that view of the matter, the petitioner may make appropriate applications as & rvhen the reSpondents notifv for rssuance ol lresh petrol bunks zLnci the respondents shall consciousl-y consider the case of the petitioner for [uture notificatious and consider his canciidature, if he is otherwise eligible.

¶36

With these observations and with the c61s6n1 of all the counsels for the parties, this Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶37

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending in this petition, if any, shall stand closed.

¶38

SD/. M. NAGAMANI ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER .)

¶39

To, .) 1 z One 9n" 99 CC to^to Sri Dominic Fernandes fSC^{Sri S. prasad Babu,} Advocate tOpUCltoi fbtf_-'l"tbpUct 3 9n" 99^{t_o Sri S.V. Ramana,} AovoiJt"t6pitt'i-'^{,"' "} 4 Two CD Copies TJ GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:0510812025

ORDER

WP.No.34639 of 2024

\.,
i.
J
,J
I
?CI il,s 2ffi
4.3 Pi.Ta. tr i.,

¶45

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶46

WITHOUT COSTS

¶47

Dontha Kiran Kumar v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Dontha Kiran Kumar v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gopu Vs Union of India

Managing Partner, M/S. Nandn Infrastructure, Hyd Vs Prl. Secretary, Revenue Dept., Hyd and 6 Others

Japal Gram Panchayat Vs The State of Telangana

Tanneeru Venkateswarlu S/o Ramaiah Vs The National Highways Authority of India

Telangana State Chess Association Vs The State of Telangana

R. Projyoth Kumar Vs The Union of India