Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CHITTA RANJAN DASH, PARTHA SARATHI SEN, JJ.
Indian Oil Corporation Limited & Others - Appellant
Versus
Rita Khatun - Respondent
F.M.A. No. 827 of 2022 & M.A.T. No. 831 of 2022 with IA No. CAN 1 of 2022
Decided On : 17-03-2023
LPG DISTRIBUTORSHIP - WITHDRAWAL OF LETTER OF INTENT (LOI) - OBC CATEGORY - VALIDITY - INTERPRETATION OF BROCHURE ON UNIFIED GUIDELINES FOR SELECTION OF LPG DISTRIBUTORSHIPS - APPLICABILITY OF CUT-OFF DATE - RELIANCE ON SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT IN RAM KUMAR GIJROYA V. DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD & ANR. - ERRONEOUS.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent applied for an LPG distributorship under the reserved category, claiming to be a member of the Other Backward Class (OBC). She submitted a caste certificate dated March 14, 2019, issued by the SDO, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas, which stated that she belonged to the 'MUSLIM MONDAL' category, recognized as backward class (OBC-Category-A) by the Government of West Bengal. Subsequently, the Oil Company issued her a letter of intent (LOI). However, the Oil Company later issued a show cause notice to the respondent, stating that she had failed to justify her OBC caste declaration by providing any substantial document. In response, the respondent submitted a fresh caste certificate dated February 22, 2021, issued by the same SDO, stating that she belonged to the 'MUSLIM MOLLA' community, which is a backward class community as per the notification issued by the Government of India. The Oil Company, however, withdrew the LOI on the ground that the respondent had failed to submit the rectified caste certificate within the last date of submission of application as prescribed in the Brochure on Unified Guidelines for Selection of LPG Distributorships.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the Brochure on Unified Guidelines for Selection of LPG Distributorships and its various clauses are binding on the Oil Company as well as the candidates seeking selection for LPG Distributorship. A Court of Law sitting in its writ jurisdiction cannot interpret the clauses of the said Brochure in a manner contrary to its proposition and perspective unless it is shown that either the whole or any of its clauses are unconstitutional. The Court further held that the respondent had failed to submit her requisite document(s) along with an application for distributorship within the last date fixed by the Oil Company and therefore, the Oil Company was within its right to withdraw the LOI issued in her favor.
Issues: 1. Whether the Oil Company was justified in withdrawing the LOI issued to the respondent on the ground that she had failed to submit the rectified caste certificate within the last date of submission of application as prescribed in the Brochure on Unified Guidelines for Selection of LPG Distributorships? 2. Whether the respondent was entitled to rely on the rectified caste certificate dated February 22, 2021, to establish her OBC status?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Brochure on Unified Guidelines for Selection of LPG Distributorships and its various clauses are binding on the Oil Company as well as the candidates seeking selection for LPG Distributorship. A Court of Law sitting in its writ jurisdiction cannot interpret the clauses of the said Brochure in a manner contrary to its proposition and perspective unless it is shown that either the whole or any of its clauses are unconstitutional. 2. The Court held that the respondent had failed to submit her requisite document(s) along with an application for distributorship within the last date fixed by the Oil Company and therefore, the Oil Company was within its right to withdraw the LOI issued in her favor. 3. The Court also held that the respondent could not acquire OBC status as per the resolution dated February 17, 2014, as published by the Union of India, merely by producing a caste certificate dated February 22, 2021, as issued by the competent authority.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order of the Single Bench. The Court also upheld the withdrawal of the LOI issued to the respondent by the Oil Company.
JUDGMENT
Partha Sarathi Sen, J.
1. In this intra-court appeal, the order dated April 19, 2022 as passed in WPA No. 5356 of 2022 by the Hon’ble Single Bench of this Hon’ble High Court in a proceeding under the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been assailed. By the impugned order, Hon’ble Single Bench allowed the writ petition of the writ petitioner/respondent herein and thereby set aside and quashed the letter of withdrawal of the letter of intent(LOI) dated December 8, 2021 as issued by the present appellant/ Indian Oil Corporation Limited hereinafter referred to as the ‘Oil company’. The appellant/Oil company felt aggrieved and thus preferred the instant appeal.
2. For effective disposal of instant appeal, the facts leading to filing of the aforementioned writ petition by the present respondent before the Hon’ble Single Bench is required to be discussed in a nutshell.
3. Pursuant to an advertisement as published in newspapers, the writ petitioner/the respondent herein has applied for obtaining the distributorship in the reserved category claiming inter alia; that she is a member of the other backward class(OBC) and in support of her contention, she relied upon a certificate dated March 14, 2019 as issued by SDO, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas. It is pertinent to mention herein that in the said certificate dated March 14, 2019 it has been mentioned that the petitioner belongs to ‘MUSLIM MONDAL’ category which is recognized as backward class(OBC-Category-A) by the Government of West Bengal.
4. Before the Writ Court it is the further case of the writ petitioner that after compliance of the requisite formalities by her though LOI was issued in favour of her by the Oil Company but on January 30, 2021, the writ petitioner was served with a show cause notice by the Oil Company wherein it has been mentioned that the writ petitioner has failed to justify her OBC caste declaration by providing any substantial document and thus the oil company expressed the view that the writ petitioner made a false declaration on affidavit.
5. In reply to such show cause, the writ petitioner/respondent herein had duly sent her reply to the Oil Company/ the appellant herein annexing therewith a copy of another caste certificate dated February 22, 2021 as issued in her favour by the SDO, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas. In her reply, the writ petitioner contended that since in her Aadhar Card the name of her father was incorrectly recorded, the OBC certificate as issued earlier was wrongly issued mentioning her community as ‘MUSLIM MANDAL’. In her reply, the writ petitioner also urged that subsequently the said error was rectified and a fresh certificate was issued in her name mentioning that she belongs to the ‘MUSLIM MOLLA’ community which is a backward class community as per the notification issued by government of India.
6. Before the writ court, the writ petitioner/ the respondent herein contended that the appellant/Oil Company however was not satisfied with the reply of the writ petitioner and thus by the impugned letter dated December 8, 2021 withdrew the LOI as issued in favour of the writ petitioner.
7. As discussed above, the Hon’ble Single Judge by the impugned order came to the conclusion that there has been no suppression/false/misrepresentation/incorrect submission on the part of the writ petitioner and since the subsequent caste certificate was issued upon rectification of the earlier certificate, the Oil Company/ the appellant herein was not justified in withdrawing the LOI as issued in favour of the writ petitioner and hence this appeal.
8. Mr. Yadav, learned advocate for the appellant/ oil company in course of his argument draws attention of this Court to the impugned order as passed by the Hon’ble Single Bench. Attention of this Court is also drawn to the Clause 8B(c) of the ‘Brochure on Unified Guidelines for Selection of LPG Distributorships’ relating to Specific Eligibility Criteria for Other Backward Classes (OBC) of the
AI
A Court of Law sitting in its writ jurisdiction cannot interpret the clauses of a Brochure on Unified Guidelines for Selection of LPG Distributorships in a manner contrary to its proposition and pers....
Point of Law : Applications for selection of regular LPG distributorships were invited in April, 2011 by BPCL. One of the eligibility criteria was that the applicant should own a plot of land of adeq....
The specific eligibility criteria in a tender or advertisement must be strictly complied with, and the terms of the advertisement or brochure must be given meaning and necessary significance.
The rejection of an LPG distributorship candidature based on discrepancies identified during the Field Verification of Credentials is valid, and principles of natural justice are not violated if the ....
Strict compliance with the specific eligibility criteria in advertisements/brochures is essential for eligibility in contractual matters.
The possession and validity of the OBC certificate at the time of application and the arbitrary cancellation of candidature influenced the court's decision to set aside the cancellation and direct th....
A valid OBC certificate must be possessed at the time of application submission to qualify for reservation benefits, not merely at the time of document verification.
Misrepresentation in eligibility criteria leads to rejection of candidacy for distributorship.
Judicial review is justified when administrative decisions lack transparency and fairness in adherence to established procedural guidelines.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
