Petitioner is an association of existing LPG distributors. In this writ petition, petitioner challenges notification issued by Bharat Petroleum Corporation (BPCL), Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL), Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) published in the daily newspapers on 15.9.2013 calling for applications for enlistment of new LPG distributors in the entire state of Andhra Pradesh (Undivided). The notification calls for applications for enlistment as distributors at 499 locations. The procedure for selection, principle of reservation, eligibility criteria are all governed by the brochure of guidelines for selection on regular LPG distributors brought about by three oil companies in May, 2013. On the ground that parameters prescribed by the Government of India for enlistment of the distributorship has not been observed, causing great hardship and suffering to the existing distributors, this writ petition is instituted.

2. The impugned notification seeks to appoint LPG distributors in 499 locations in undivided State of Andhra Pradesh. Out of 499, 440 locations were against restructuring, 48 were newly identified markets and 11 were against the terminated distributorships. Petitioner challenges the said notification on the ground that if these 499 distributors are appointed, it would adversely affect the existing distributors in carrying on the business. These locations are in addition to the locations identified under RGGLV Project.

3. Heard Sri S.R.Ashok, learned senior counsel appearing for petitioner association and Sri B. Mayur Reddy for respondents 3 to 7 and Mrs Nanda for Union of India- respondent no.8.

4. Sri S.R.Ashok, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that there is wholesale breach of the policy evolved by the respondent company regarding provision of distributors and identification of locations in present notification process. He has relied on the minutes of meeting dated 3.4.2013 presided over by the Defence Minister, Union of India which has laid down the guidelines for entrustment of LPG dealership. These norms are based on the population in particular locality. According to the norms, a standard distributor is expected to have a turnover of distribution of cylinders to an extent of 22000. Learned senior counsel therefore contended that while determining the number of dealerships in any area where already a distribution agency exists, unless the said distribution agency reaches 125 % on the target fixed, there cannot be induction of new dealership. Once a policy is formulated by the Government of India and the respondent oil companies, they are bound by the said policy and violation of the policy vitiates the entire exercise.

5. Learned senior counsel submitted that in several distribution locations listed out in the notification existing dealers have far less consumer base than the target determined by the oil companies and, therefore, the present exercise of awarding more dealerships, is wholly illegal and in clear violation of their own policy. The distribution capacity is on the basis of the number of cylinders distributed in a month but not the volume of customers. In support of his contention, learned senior counsel circulated a list of out-lets in various places including Hyderabad referring to the customer base as well as turnover in various cities. Learned senior counsel submitted that none of these towns and cities have fulfilled the parameters of attainment of 125 % sales. He further contended that all the oil companies have together, advertised for new retail dealers, whereas each oil company have separate dealers and in each of the oil company, the requirement is nil or limited in various places as per the norms prescribed. Cumulative exercise was not done by taking into consideration the sales of the retail outlets in a particular town irrespective of the company distributorship.

6. The problem of dealers is compounded on account of change in th