The judgment emphasizes the limited scope of judicial review for commercial decisions and the need for detailed investigation of residency issues as per established legal principles.

S.K.Katriar, J.

1. This writ petition relates to appointment of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (for short L.P.G.) distributorship for Mahua in the district of Vaishali.

2. According to the writ petition, the respondent-Corporation had published an advertisement on 2-6-1998 for the said purpose which could not make headway and was abandoned. The Corporation published the second advertisement for the same purpose which was published in the local dailies on 28-8-2000 (Annexure-1), was really in continuation of the earlier advertisement because of reference of the earlier one in the present one and shall be referred to at the >appropriate stage. The petitioner, respondent No. 5, and others applied for the same Call letters for interview were issued on 6-11-2003, and the select list was published on 27-11-2003 wherein respondent No. 5 figured at serial No. 1, and the petitioner at serial No. 2. It is further stated in the Writ petition that the petitioner submitted his complaint on 5-12-2003 to the Corporation (Annexure-7) which has remained unattended till date. Field inspection was completed and the letter of intent was issued to respondent No. 5 on 20-8-2004 (Annexure-A to the counter affidavit of respondent No. 5). Feeling aggrieved by the selection process as well as the inaction of the respondent authorities as to his complaint, the petitioner has preferred the writ petition.

3. The two sets of respondents have filed their separate counter affidavits wherein they have supported the impugned action.

4. While assailing the validity of the impugned order, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the terms and conditions of the advertisement, the candidate has to be a permanent resident of the revenue district wherein the place is situate. Village-Mahua is situate in the district of Vaishali and, therefore, respondent No. 5 has to be resident of the said district, whereas respondent No. 5 is a resident of Patna and has tenuous connection with the district of Vaishali. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Hajipur. He relies on the following reported judgments:

(i) -, Anil Kumar Singh V/s. Union of India and Ors.

(ii) - (Bhagwan Dass and Anr. V/s. Kamal Abrol and Ors.).

He next submitted that respondent No. 5 had already started working since January 2005, ineligible persons cannot be permitted to operate and, therefore, the dealership may be directed to be granted to the petitioner for which he is prepared to suitably compensate respondent No. 5 as per the assessment of the respondent Corporation. Power of judicial review should be exercised in the interest of justice. He relies on the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in - , Para 9 (Babubhai Muljibhai Patel V/s. Nandlal Khodidas Barot and Ors.) and 2000 (1) PLJR 935, Para 8 (Tej Pratap Singh V/s. The Union of India and Ors.). He also submitted that the petitioner is more qualified than respondent No. 5.

5. Learned Counsel for respondent No. 5 has submitted that the petitioner is himself ineligible to apply because the petitioners full brother is a licensee from the respondent Corporation for L.P.G. distributorship for the place Ebrahimpur Beura, district Muzaffarpur, in the handicapped category. He relies on the judgment reported in 2000 (2) PLJR 475 : AIR 2000 Pat 229 (Kaushal Kishore V/s. The Union of India and Ors.). He next submitted that the issue relating to residence raised by the petitioner involves tangled questions of facts which cannot be adjudicated on the basis of affidavits in writ jurisdiction. He has also made strenuous efforts to explain the documents relied on by the petitioner to establish that the petitioner is not a resident of Mahua. He also submitted that the petitioner is a fraud, has obtained certificates for residence for Muzaffarpur, Vaishali, Darbhanga and Patna. He has not approached this Court with clean hands. He next submitted that the petitioner has created a network of such agencies spread over the districts of Vaisha