SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Bom) 816

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
G. S. Kulkarni, Advait M. Sethna, JJ.
Sagar Bhagirath Karate - Petitioner
Versus
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., through its Selection Committee & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 3547 of 2024, Writ Petition No. 3490 of 2024
Decided On : 02-04-2025 

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Pritesh Burad a/w. Mrs. Disha Patil i/b. Pritesh Burad Associates for the petitioners.
Mr. Chirag Mody a/w. Mr. Ashok Purohit, Ms. Vishakha Patel i/b. Ashok Purohit & Co. for respondent no. 1.
Mr. Ashutosh Mishra a/w. Mr. Rupesh Dubey for UOI.
Mr. Pushkar Naik i/b. Mr. Karan Vaity for respondent no. 4.

The requirement of a registered lease deed for land in dealership applications is mandatory to prevent disputes and protect investments, and failure to comply results in rejection of the application.

Headnote:

(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ of Mandamus - Petition challenging rejection of application for retail outlet dealership due to non-compliance with eligibility criteria regarding land documentation - The petitioner failed to submit a registered lease deed as required, leading to rejection of the application. (Paras 1, 4, 8, 13)

(B) Eligibility Criteria - The necessity of a registered lease deed for land offered in applications for retail outlets is emphasized to prevent future disputes and protect investments made by the oil company. (Paras 4, 10)

(C) Principles of Natural Justice - The court held that the petitioner did not demonstrate any real prejudice caused by the alleged breach of natural justice, as the reasons for rejection were adequately communicated. (Paras 12, 13)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner applied for a retail outlet dealership but submitted a notarized lease deed instead of a registered one, failing to meet the eligibility criteria set by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOCL).

Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner did not comply with the mandatory requirements for the application, particularly regarding land documentation, leading to the rejection of the application.

Issues: The main issues were whether the rejection of the application was justified based on the failure to provide a registered lease deed and whether the principles of natural justice were violated.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the requirement for a registered lease deed was essential to ensure clarity and prevent disputes over land ownership, and that the petitioner failed to prove any real prejudice from the rejection process.

Result: Petition rejected.

ORDER :

G.S. Kulkarni, J.

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for the following substantive reliefs:

“(a) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, thereby quashing and setting aside the said Communication, i.e., 4th e-mail dated 02.01.2024 (Exhibit H) and Letter dated 08.02.2024 (Exhibit K).

(b) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, thereby directing the respondents to consider the said application bearing no. IOC16953799891734 (Exhibit B) for selection as eligible in Group II and reinstate the claim on the said Application for award of RO Dealership of IOCL under Class II Group without further delay.”

2. On 28 June, 2023, respondent no. 1-Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (for short “IOCL”) published an advertisement along with a brochure for selection of dealers for Regular & Rural Retail Outlets through bidding process. In pursuance of the said advertisement, the petitioner on 22 September, 2023 submitted an online application. The petitioner was a Group II applicant. The application of the petitioner was to be submitted in the prescribed form along with all the relevant documents. One of the document was a notarized lease deed which was submitted by the petitioner along with the application.

3. At this juncture, we may note that there are several terms and conditions which are required to be fulfilled in making the application and more particularly in respect of the land which is being offered for setting up of a retail outlet being applied for. One of such essential requirement is of the applicant possessing a registered sale deed or gift deed in respect of the land and if it is a leasehold land, a registered lease deed. The conditions in that regard are found in Clause 4(vi), providing for the “Eligibility Criteria” which reads thus:

“4. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR INDIVIDUAL APPLICANTS –

PROPRIETORSHIP / PARTNERSHIP Common Eligibility Criteria for all Categories applying as Individual (as on date of application unless mentioned otherwise)

...… ....…

(vi) Land (Applicable to all categories):

The applicants would be classified into three groups as mentioned below based on the land offered or land not offered by them in the application form: -

Group–1: Applicants having suitable piece of land in the advertised location/area either by way of ownership / long term lease for a period of minimum 19 years 11 months or as advertised by the OMC.

Group - 2: Applicants having Firm Offer for a suitable piece of land for purchase or long-term lease for a period of minimum 19 years 11 months or as advertised by the OMC.

Group-3: Applicants who have not offered land in the application. Only applicable for locations advertised under SC/ST category.

Applications under Group - 3 would be processed/advised to offer land (Annexure - D) only in case no eligible applicant is found or no applicant get selected under Group - 1 & Group – 2.

In case land offered by all the applicants under Group - 1 & Group - 2 is found not suitable/not meeting requirements, then these applicant/s under Group - 1 & Group - 2 along with applicants under Group - 3 (who did not offer land along with application) would be advised by the OMCs to provide suitable land in the advertised location/stretch, within a period of 90 days from the date of issuance of intimation letter to them through SMS/e-mail. In case the applicant fails to provide suitable land within the prescribed period, or the land provided is found not meeting the laid down criteria, the application would be rejected.

The other conditions with respect to offering of land are as under: -

a) The land should be available with the applicant as on the date of application and should have minimum lease of 19 years and 11 months (as advertised by respective oil company) from the date or after the date

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top