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

2003 Supreme(Del) 355

A.K.SIKRI
RAKESH KUMAR TYAGI – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AMIT BANSAL, RAKESH TIKKU, SUNIL K.MITTAL, V.K.SRIVASTAVA

A. K. SIKRI, J.

( 1 ) RESPONDENT No. 3, namely. , Hindustan petroleum Corporation Limited had issued public notice/advertisement on 18th April, 1995 inviting application for retail outlet/ dealership of petrol pump. Terms and conditions, for allotment of retail outlet dealership, as stipulated in the advertisement were as under: " (a) None of the close relatives viz. Spouse/father/mother/son/daughter/ sister/brother-in-law/daughter-in-law/parents- in-law held dealership/distributorship of any oil company for any petroleum product in india. (b) The applicant or any of his above mentioned relations had earlier not been issued a letter of intent/appointment for any dealership or agency by any oil company in india for any petroleum product. (c) The gross income of the applicant and his spouse and children put together does not exceed Rs. 50,000/- p. a. (d) No charge has been framed against the applicant nor any court has ever convicted him for any criminal case involving moral turpitude and for any economic offence nor any such proceedings are pending against the applicant. (e) The applicant should be the permanent resident of Delhi and for which a residence certificate signed by a Rev





























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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top