JUDGMENT :

Subhendu Samanta, J.

1. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited published an advertisement to appoint retail outlet dealers on various location of State of West Bengal. Petitioner submitted application for a location namely “within 10 Kms from Heavyr More towards Raniganj on NH 60 in the District of Bankura”. Petitioner was declared as successful candidate.

2. The land Evaluation Committee inspected the proposed land of the petitioner and thereafter intimated the petitioner that the offer land did not meet the required norms. HPCL informed the petitioner to offer alternative land in the advertised location. Petitioner requested again to consider the same land but his prayer was not considered. Petitioner made further representation which was also turned down.

3. Petitioner’s approach this court in WPA No. 4103 of 2022 wherein a Co-ordinate Bench of this court has disposed of the said writ petition directing the HPCL to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 3rd December, 2021 and 17th January 2022 within 60 days.

4. Vide impugned memo dated 20nd April 2022, the respondent HPCL disposed of both the representation of the petitioner with a finding that the offer land cannot be accepted and further selection process could not be proceeded.

5. Hence this writ.

6. Learned Counsel Mr. Agarwal, on behalf of the petitioner submits that the act and action of the respondent authority is highly suspicious and not tenable in the eye of law. He further submits that the respondent authority has acted arbitrarily in disposing of the representation of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that retail outlet dealership of the present petitioner will be required to be considered as “urban stretch”.

7. Mr. Agarwal specifically demonstrated the issue involved in the instant writ petition by submitted that the respondent has turned down the prayer of the petitioner by virtue of a notification dated 20th June 2020 by Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (S & R (P & B) Section).

8. Mr. Agarwal submits that the team of the HPCL after visiting the proposed offer land of the petitioner, they have noted that “it is found that there is a road at within 300 meters of the said plot. This road was found to be more than 300 meters in length and 3 meters wide bituminous top”. Hence, offer land is not meeting of the current NHAI guideline.

9. Mr. Agarwal further argued that the location of the offer land cannot be categorised as rural stretch of National Highways. It should be categorised as urban stretches of National Highways. Mr. Agarwal has also pointed out the relevant notification of NHAI dated 26th June 2020, wherein the categorisation of locations of stretches of Fuel Stations along with National High Ways were depicted.

Norms for Location, Layout and Access to Fuel Stations along National Highways

1.1 The term "Fuel Station" shall include Petroleum Retail Outlets, CNG/ Gas Retail Outlets, Electrical Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations, bio fuel pumps, wayside amenities etc.

1.2 When the cross slope of the country is more than 25%, the terrain shall be classified as hilly or mountainous terrain. Where National Highway passes through a town of population of 20,000 and more (census 2011 will apply), the stretch shall be categorized as urban stretches.

10. Mr. Agarwal argued that if the offer land comes under the urban stretch then the insertion with any category of road and median gap required -100 meters. He submits that in the sited location i.e. Purandarpur the population is more than 20,000 but the authority concerned has considered the population of Purandarpur according to census, 2011. Mr. Agarwal further agued that the advertisement was published in the year 2018, the Local Panchayet Prodhan has issued a certificate containing inter alia that the population of Purandarpur, District Bankura is more than 20,000.

11. Mr. Agarwal further argued that the action of the HPCL cannot be accepted in this case as they have only taken into acco