w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n

Jyoti Swaroop v/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Others

    Civil Writ Petition No. 254 of 2005

    Decided On, 31 August 2016

    At, High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench


    For the Petitioner: Anoop Dhand, Advocate. For the Respondents: Krishna Verma, Akhll Simlote, Advocates.

Judgment Text

1. Aggrieved of the order dated 3rd February, 2004 (Annexure-22) and of the action of the respondent number 1, in withdrawal of the application for No Objection Certificate from the District Collector, Sikar; the petitioner has instituted the present writ application praying for the following relief(s) :

"(i) quash and set aside the order and application of respondent No. 1 by which the application of NOC has been withdrawn from the District Collector, Sikar (Anx. 29).

(ii) further please to quash and set the order dated 3.2.2004 (Annexure-22) passed by the respondent No. 2.

(iii) further pleased to cancel the advertisement (Annexure.23) issued by the respondent No.1 to the extent of fresh allotment of Retail Outlet at village Dadiya (Daulatpura)

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

, Dist. Sikar under female quota

(iv) further pleased to quash and set aside the order dated 27.12.04 (Annexure.37) passed by the respondent No.2

(v) further pleased to quash and set aside the allotment of Retail outlet of IOC in favour of respondent No.3 on land bearing khasra No. 1242/166 situated at village Dadiya (Daulatpura) Dist. Sikar and

(vi) further pleased to direct the respondents Nos.1 and 2 to issue NOC in the name of the petitioner and pass order of allotment for establishing the Retail Outlet of IOC on the land Khasra No. 1241/166 Rakba 0.22 Hectare at village Dadiya (Daulatpura) Dist. Sikar in favour of the petitioner.

For This Act Of Kindness The Petitioner Shall Every Pray."

2. Briefly, the essential skeletal material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised herein are that the petitioner applied for allotment of Retail Outlet on 16th October, 2002. It is pleaded case of the petitioner that he purchased land bearing Khasra No. 1242/166 and also deposited conversion charges for conversion of the land for establishment of a Retail Outlet. The respondent - Indian Oil Corporation (for short "the respondent-Corporation"), also moved an application for grant of Objection Certificate' for establishing the Retail Outlet. The matter was referred to the concerned authorities for necessary action. However, in the meantime, the sellers of the land involved herein, lodged a complaint with the District Magistrate, Sikar, not to issue No Objection Certificate to the petitioner. Consequently, an order was made, which became subject matter of S.B. Civil Writ Petition Number 3273 of 2003, wherein the order of the District Magistrate, Sikar, was quashed with a further direction to decide the matter afresh affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within seven days of receipt of the copy of the order dated 25th November, 2003, passed by this Court. In the meantime, another advertisement was issued by the respondent-Corporation on 19.01.2004; inviting applications from the eligible candidates for allotment of Retail Outlet Dealership of Petroleum Products. However, the advertisement was limited to female candidates only.

3. Learned counsel, Mr. Anoop Dhand, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, reiterating the pleaded facts and grounds of the writ application, vehemently argued that the entire proceedings including allotment of Retail Outlet Dealership of Petroleum Products in favour of the respondent number 3 was made for oblique motives and in order to favour respondent number 3 at the instance of the then member of the parliament for Sikar. According to the learned counsel, the District Magistrate, Sikar, declined the application instituted by the respondent-Corporation for the petitioner withdrew his application, which was submitted in response to advertisement (Annexure-1), wherein the last date of submission of the application, by the eligible candidates, was 9th October, 2002, by 2.00 PM.

4. Referring to the application dated 20th December, 2002, instituted by the respondent-Corporation seeking No Objection Certificate for establishment of Retail Outlet in Khasra No. 1242/166 at Daulatpura, District Sikar; learned counsel would submit that the proceedings were carried out in an extraordinary haste manner for No Objection Certificate, was accorded by the Village Panchayat, Daulatpura, Panchayat Samiti, Piprali, District Sikar, within two days i.e. 22nd December, 2004. The necessary entries by way of mutation were also carried out and the entire process concluded on 27th December, 2004. So much so that even the site inspection was carried out on 25th December, 2004. which speaks volume about the manner, the matter was proceed with at the instance of the then member of the parliament. Referring to the order dated 1st April, 2009 made by this Court; the learned Counsel asserted that he moved an application with a prayer to impleaded Mr. Subhas Mehriya, as a party respondent to the writ proceedings, who was the then member of the parliament for the specific allegations of malafide levelled in the writ application. Though Mr. Akhil Simlote, was allowed time to respond to the application, but no reply has been filed till date.

5. However, learned counsel did not dispute the fact that the petitioner withdrew his application vide communication dated 14th November, 2003, which has been placed on record along with counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent-Corporation.

6. In response to the writ application, the respondent- Corporation has filed its counter affidavit. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-Corporation, reiterating the stand in the reply while supporting the action of the respondent-Corporation, asserted that the writ application itself is not maintainable for the reason that vide Annexure-1, the respondent-Corporation only invited applications from the eligible candidates in order to raise a land bank and it was response to that advertisement, the petitioner submitted his application. However, the petitioner himself withdrew from the proceedings, as would be evident from Annexure-R-1/1 dated 14th November, 2003. Furthermore, the subsequent advertisement was published on 19th January, 2004, inviting applications from eligible candidates for allotment of Retail Outlet Dealers of Petorleum Products only for female candidates. The petitioner could not apply in that category, and therefore, the issue raised in the instant writ application has become infructuous.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance, perused the materials available on records as well as gave my thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions at Bar.

8. Indisputably, the Annexure-1, the respondent- Corporation invited applications from eligible candidates in order to create a land bank. Moreover, there is not even whisper in the advertisement for allotment of any Retail Outlet of Petroleum Products. Further, it was none-else but the respondent-Corporation, who filed an application seeking No Objection Certificate' from the District Magistrate, Sikar, to establish a Retail Outlet in Khasra No. 1242/166. Be that as it may, the matter was closed vide order 1 dated 3rd February, 2004, for the petitioner declined to enter into any agreement by way of lease with the respondent-Corporation. Consequently, the respondent-Corporation withdrew the application seeking No Objection Certificate from the District Magistrate, Sikar, for establishment of Retail Outlet on the land involved herein.

9. For the petitioner himself withdrew from the proceedings, as would be evident from the order dated 3rd February, 2004; the entire controversy raised with respect to subsequent advertisement is of no consequence.

10. In the result, the instant writ application fails and is hereby dismissed. Application seeking impleadment of the then member of parliament also stands closed.

11. No costs.

Writ petition dismissed.

Already A Member?