IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.
Mafidul Islam, S/o. Azim Uddin Ahmed and Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Rep. By Its Chairman and Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) No.497 Of 2019
Decided On : 22-05-2024
residence - L.P.G. distributor selection - Clause 15(c) of the guidelines - 2005) 11 SCC 66, WP(C) No.505/2021, WP(C) 8669/2019, WA 325/2023 - The court discussed the interpretation of 'residence' in the context of Clause 15(c) of the guidelines for L.P.G. distributor selection. It highlighted the requirement of continuous living in the advertised location for a considerable period of time to qualify as a resident. The court referred to the decision in Bhagwan Dass v. Kamal Abrol and others (2005) 11 SCC 66 and other cases to emphasize the importance of actual dwelling in a place for a considerable period as distinguished from a mere temporary residence due to possession of property.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought to set aside the selection of respondent No.3 as an L.P.G. distributor, alleging that he did not meet the residency requirement for the advertised location.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondent No.3's purchase of land within the advertised location post-advertisement and before the initial last date of submission was done to be eligible under the advertisement, and his continuous living in the location was doubtful.
Issues: The main issue was whether the respondent No.3 met the residency requirement under Clause 15(c) of the guidelines for L.P.G. distributor selection.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the requirement of continuous living in the advertised location for a considerable period of time to qualify as a resident, as highlighted in the interpretation of 'residence' in the context of Clause 15(c) of the guidelines.
Final Decision: The court set aside and quashed the selection of the respondent No.3 as an L.P.G. distributor at Bilpar under Shyampur Gaon Panchayat, as it was found to be in contravention of Clause 15(c) of the guidelines.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. A. Zahid, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the respondent No.3.
2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are seeking for setting aside and quashing of the impugned selection of respondent No.3 as Durgam Kshetriya Vitrak at Bilpar under Shyampur Gaon Panchayat as L.P.G. distributor of respondent company, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
3. Pursuant to an advertisement published in the Assamese daily newspaper “Axomiya Pratidin” on 12.06.2018, the respondent authorities along with Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., for appointing distributors for liquid petroleum gas (LPG) cylinders in various areas with various type of market under various categories in the State, the petitioners who belonged from Shyampur Gaon Panchayat applied for the category of Durgam Kshetriya Vitrak for the place of Bilpar under Shyampur Gaon Panchayat at Dalgaon under Darrang district, submitted online application forms on 13.07.2018.
4. The respondent authorities in terms of the brochure published on unified guidelines for selection of L.P.G. distributors (hereinafter referred to as ‘guidelines’) for Sheheri Vitrak, Rurban Vitrak, Gramin Vitrak was required to conduct the selection.
5. Clause 15(c) of the said guidelines provided the manner in which inter-se priority is to be adopted at the time of draw of lots which is as follows-
C. Inter se' priority is given in the draw of lots to the eligible applicants for the Durgam Kshetriya Vitrak locations only as per the following order:
i. Eligible applicants, residing in the concerned Gram panchayat of the advertised location.
ii. Eligible applicants, residing in the concerned Revenue Sub-Division of the advertised location.
iii. Eligible applicants, not residing in the concerned Gram Panchayat or in the concerned Revenue Sub-Division of the advertised location."
For Sheheri Vitrak, Rurban Vitrak, Gramin Vitrak, the inter se' priority based on residence of candidate in the concerned Gram Panchayat or concerned Revenue Sub-Division will not be applicable.”
6. The list of applicants found eligible for draw of lot for selection of L.P.G. distributors by giving Inter-se Priority List 1 (applicants residing in the concerned Gram Panchayat of the advertised location), Inter-se Priority List 2 (applicants residing in the concerned revenue sub-division of the advertised location) and Inter-se Priority List 3 (applicants not residing in the concerned Gram Panchayat or in the concerned revenue sub-division of the advertised location) was published.
7. Pertinent, that the petitioner’s names were included in the Inter-se Priority List 1.
8. Thereafter, the petitioners were also informed vide a letter dated 20.07.2018 that they have been qualified for online computerized draw of lots to be held on 27.07.2018 at the Deputy Commissioner’s Office, Kamrup.
9. On 27.07.2018, when the petitioners attended the draw of lots, it came to their notice that in the Inter-sePriority List 1 the names of three (3) candidates appeared who does not belong to stipulated area of Shyampur Gaon Panchayat. Accordingly, the petitioners verbally objected before the authority that the candidate at Sl. No.1, i.e., Ujjal Ghosh belongs to Mangaldoi town, the candidate at Sl. No. 2, Abdul Latif Mandal belongs to Kopati Gaon Panchayat and candidate at Sl. No. 4, i.e., Nokibul Islam (respondent No.3) belongs to Baligaon Gaon Panchayat.
10. After the objection raised by the petitioners, the draw of lots held on 27.07.2018 was cancelled and was again held on 10.10.2018. However, without considering the objection raised by the petitioner, the respondent No.3, i.e., Nokibur Islam was declared selected to be appointed as the L.P.G. distributor at Bilpar under Shyampur Gaon Pan
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of 'residence' in the context of Clause 15(c) of the guidelines for L.P.G. distributor selection, emphasizing the requirement of....
Clause 11.4 of Guidelines stipulates that in case there are more than one eligible applicant, selection of LPG Distributorship will be done through computerized draw of lots from eligible applicants ....
The main legal point established is that the term 'resident' must be interpreted in the context of the purpose of the statute and the actual place of residence, as defined by the Supreme Court.
Residency for distributorship must adhere to precise definitions and established documentation, favoring actual residence over claims of ownership.
Selection process for LPG distributorship must comply with established guidelines; mere allegations without supporting evidence do not invalidate the selection.
Residency requirements as per the Unified Guidelines for Selection of LPG Distributorships of October 2017 must be met for LPG Distributorship appointments, and appointments can be quashed based on i....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.