ORDER :

Ujjal Bhuyan, J.

1. Heard Mr. K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. K.K. Parashar, learned counsel, for respondent No. 1; Mr. P.J. Saikia, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 6 and Mr. B. Barman, learned counsel for respondent No. 7.

2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has challenged the legality and correctness of the decision of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) to appoint respondent No. 7 as LPG distributorship at Kamargaon under Chak-chaka Block in the district of Barpeta under Rajiv Gandhi Gramin LPG Vitarak (RGGLV) scheme and has sought for a direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 6 to award her the distributorship.

3. As would be evident from the above, subject-matter of the writ petition is award of LPG distributorship under the RGGLV at Kamargaon under Chakchaka Block in the district of Barpeta. In this connection, advertisement was issued on 21.02.2013 by the BPCL. Petitioner as well as respondent No. 7 had responded to the said advertisement and had qualified for the draw which was held on 30.1.2014. It appears that following the draw, respondent No. 7 was selected for award of distributorship which is under challenge in the present proceeding. Challenge has been made on the ground that land offered by respondent No. 7 did not belong to him or to his family members or to his parents or to his grandparents which is the eligibility requirement. Therefore, candidature of respondent No. 7 ought to have been rejected but instead of doing that, opportunity was granted to respondent No. 7 to furnish alternative plot of land and after alternative plot of land was furnished by respondent No. 7, it was decided to allot distributorship to him.

4. On the other hand, land offered by the petitioner stands in her name and, therefore, petitioner should have been considered for allotment of LPG distributorship after rejecting the candidature of respondent No. 7.

5. When the writ petition was moved on 24.08.2015, this Court while issuing notice observed that prima facie contention of the petitioner appeared to be correct and thereafter passed an interim order to the effect that no appointment of RGGLV distributorship in respect of Kamargaon under Chakchaka Block in the district of Barpeta should be made without leave of the Court.

6. Respondents have filed their respective affidavits to which petitioner has filed rejoinder.

7. Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 have also filed an Interlocutory Application for vacation of the aforesaid interim order dated 24.08.2018 which has been registered as IA(C) No. 1903/2017. However, Mr. Saikia, learned counsel, representing respondent Nos. 2 to 6 submitted that instead of the IA, entire writ petition may be heard whereafter writ petition has been heard.

8. The brochure for selection of RGGLV distributorship, particularly, Clause-5 thereof, lays down the mode of selection. The applicant must have plot of land suitable for setting up distributorship. In case, an applicant has more than one suitable plot of land for construction of godown for storage of 5000 kg of LPG in cylinders or ready LPG cylinder godown of 5000 kg capacity, then details of the same can also be provided in the application.

9. According to the petitioner, the land must be in the name of the applicant or in the name of members of his family unit or parents or grandparents, both maternal and paternal. In so far petitioner is concerned, the land offered by the petitioner belonged to herself. On the other hand, land offered by respondent No. 7 belonged to the younger brother of paternal grandfather which does not fulfill the eligibility requirement.

10. Responding to the above contention of the petitioner, both Mr. Saikia and Mr. Barman submit that if a land mentioned by an applicant in his application is found not suitable for godown and the applicant has offered another plot of land, it would be in order to consider the alternative plot of land if it is in the name of the a