The appellant before us is an aspirant for dealership of a petroleum high speed diesel outlet of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited. The location, for which he made the application in response to a public advertisement was Manjhiawn Kala in the district of Garhwa. At the stage of initial evaluation of the appellant’s application, he was empanelled as the first candidate for the purpose of selection as a dealer. But subsequently, after field verification, marks allocated to him as per disclosed norms was reduced and he was downgraded to second position in the panel. The reason for such downgrading was his evaluation on financial capability. The learned First Court had confirmed the act of his downgrading when the appellant approached this Court invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

2. There are various parameters on which an applicant for such dealership is evaluated. These parameters appear in the advertisement which was published in the newspapers as well as in a brochure of the oil company. But we are not concerned with all the parameters in this appeal as downgrading of the appellant in the list of empanelled candidates had been done only on evaluation of his financial capability. In the advertisement, under the eighth and ninth columns, estimated investment required for an applicant, excluding the land cost, for the outlet in question was stipulated to be Rs. 15 Lakhs. Further, a sum of Rs. 6 Lakhs was stipulated to be the requirement of working capital for operating the retail outlet. This advertisement, however, did not carry any specific stipulation that the applicant must have the said sum of Rs.21 Lakhs in total, readily available at the time of making of the application and thereafter retain such balance. In clause 14 (ii) of the brochure, there was indication as regards allocation of marks under specific heads in respect of individual applicants. That was the methodology for evaluation of capabilities of an individual applicant. It was stipulated under this clause:

“Allocation of marks on various parameters in respect of individual applicants.

Parameter	Sub-heads	Description	Marks	Evaluation
Land and infrastructure (Max. 35 marks)	Suitable land for retail outlet	Having “own land” or having land on long lease (registered) for a minimum period of 30 years as on date of application Having “firm offer” of land	35     _____ 25	Based on the evaluation of the committee as explained in 14(i) above.
			Max. Marks
Finance (Max. 25 Marks)	Financially sound	Ready availability of Finance (20 marks) Liquid cash in the form of bank balance, Fixed deposits, shares of listed companies etc.   Fixed and movable assets includes own land, buildings, shops, house, vehicles, etc.   Income includes agricultural income, business income, interest, rent, royalty, etc. duly supported by documentary evidence.	12               4       _____ 4	Based on verifying the documents submitted. Valuation report duly certified by Govt. Approved Valuers in support of assets is necessary.
	Note: (1) Cash, Jewellery and instruments where the ownership can not be established will not be considered as “Liquid cash” or “Assets”.   (2) With regard to source of funds declared by the applicant in the application form, it is necessary that the same would be made available for the RO development purpose as and when required. The applicant should submit an affidavit (Appendix A or A1) in this regard. In case the applicant fails to make available the funds committed at the time when it is actually required or could not substantiate at a later date, the candidature/dealership is liable to be cancelled.

3. The reason for downgrading of the app