Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CYRIAC JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR
Smt. Moumita Poddar
Versus
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd & Another
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6071-6072 OF 2010 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 2102930 of 2008)
Decided on : 30-07-2010
Writ Appeal - Dealership was only for Open Category - Indian Oil Corporation, respondent No.1, published a notice for appointment of Retail Outlet Dealership in local newspapers in the State of Tripura situated - Advertisement shows that, the type of dealership offered was "Dealer owned - Held, Court have also noted that it is not a case where the selection is vitiated by proved mala fides; nor any allegations of undue favour being shown to respondent No.2 have been made - Even leaving aside the loss which would be incurred by respondent No.2 it would not be possible for this court to ignore the far reaching consequences of cancellation of the retail outlet in the small State where such facilities are not in abundance - Therefore, keeping in view the overall public interest, Court decline to exercise the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the selection made in favour of respondent - Appeal dismissed.
Judgment :
SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals have been filed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh and Tripura, Bench at Agartala in Writ Appeal No: 53/2005 along with connected Writ Appeal No: 54/2005, wherein the Division Bench was pleased to set aside the common order of the Single Judge in W.P (C) No. 259/2004.
3. We may briefly notice here the facts which are necessary to decide the legal issues raised herein:
Indian Oil Corporation, respondent No.1, published a notice on 19.2.2004 for appointment of Retail Outlet Dealership in local newspapers in the State of Tripura situated at Ranirbazar and Agartala. The advertisement shows that for Ranirbazar, the type of dealership offered was "Dealer owned". The advertisement further indicates that dealership at both the locations were for women. At Ranirbazar the dealership was only for Open Category (Women). The last date for submission of applications was 19.03.2004. The relevant clauses for advertisement were as under:
"NOTICE
Appointment of Retail Outlet Dealer Indian Oil Corporation Limited (Marketing division) Invites applications for appointment of Dealers for Retail Outlet dealership in the State of Tripura at the following locations for dealer owned/ Company Owned Retail Outlets on site owned by Dealer/to be taken by the Company on outright sale or lease:
Sl. Location Revenue Type of D'ship Category
No. Dist. Co. Owned/
Dealer owned
1. Ranirbazar West Dealer owned OP
Tripura (Women)
2 Agartala West Company ST
Tripura owned (Women)
Important Note
(a) The candidate should furnish along with the application, details of land, which he/she may make available for the Retail Outlet.
(b) Considering the location of the land from the point of view of suitability from commercial angle and rates acceptable to IOCL (AOD), applicants already having land and willing to transfer the land on ownership/long lease to IOCL (AOD), would be given preference.
(c) If an applicant, after selection is unable to provide the land indicated by him/her in the application form within a period of two (2) months from the date of Letter of Intent (LOI), the Company will have the right to cancel the allotment of dealership to him/her. Suitability of land will be decided by the Company. There is no commitment from the Company for taking the offered land from the applicant."
"14. APPLICATION FORMS AND ENCLOSURES COMPLETE IN ALL RESPECTS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN DUPLICATE ALONG WITH NON-REFUNDABLE FEE SO AS TO REACH THE OFFICE ADDRESS MENTIONED ABOVE BEFORE THE CLOSE OF OFFICE ON 19.03.2004."
4. In response to this advertisement, the appellant submitted her application on 12.3.2004, for appointment of Retail Outlet Dealer in Open Category (Women) for the location at Ranirbazar. In her application, the appellant offered to set up the dealership on land, purchased by her mother-in-law, being C.S. Plot Nos. 2172, 2173 and 2174/4035 and another land purchased by her father-in-law, Mr. Binoy Krishna Poddar, measuring 1.36 Acres in Dag No.1075, Hal Dag No. 1679 of Khatian No.491 situated in Mouja Bridhya Nagar, Tehsil: Khoyerpur, Bridhya Nagar at the periphery of Ranirbazar, the entire area being commonly known as Ranirbazar. According to the appellant, the aforesaid land being situated on the Assam-Agartala Road, (National Highway-44) with the frontage of 51.5 Metres on the road, is most suitable for the purpose of setting up the Retail Outlet. Both her mother-in-law and father-in-law furnished an undertaking that the said land could be used by the appellant for the aforesaid purpose. They had duly executed documents expressing their readiness and willingness to allow the appellant to use the aforesaid land for installation of the retail outlet dealership and to lease out the same to respondent No.1, on long term basis, if she was offered a letter of intent. All the relevant documents were furnished with th
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.