Balance of convenience not found in favour of petitioner.

1. O.A. No. 441 of 2008 has been filed to suspend the order of termination passed by the third respondent vide Ref. TCN.LPG.JOTHI dated 18.1.2008 pending proceedings of the Arbitrator.

O.A. No. 442 of 2008 has been filed to direct the respondents herein to re-deliver the goods taken by them such as all records including SV/TV pads, entire stock of LPG filed/empty cylinders, DPRs/equipments taken from Jothi Gas service, Tirunelveli and permitting the petitioner to continue the distributorship of Bharat Gas at Tirunelveli as per the Distributorship Agreement dated 13.7.2004 pending the proceedings of the Arbitrator.

2. The brief facts as culled out from the affidavit filed in support of O.A.Nos.441 & 442 of 2008 are as under: The applicant applied for distributorship of LPG. Bharat Gas by her application dated 3.10.2000. She was selected by the Corporation for LPG distributorship. Before attending the interview on 7.2.2004, she entered into an agreement of sale with one S.M. Farooq for purchasing the lands for the purpose of construction of godown if the distributorship for LPG. Gas is allotted to her. In the Letter of Intent dated 5.3.2004, the respondents stated that she has to procure a suitable plot measuring to 36 m × 29 m for storing LPG in cylinders either purchased by her or leased to her initially for a period of 10 years with renewal option.

3. After receiving the Letter of Intent (LOI) she came to know that the land for which the agreement of sale was entered into with S.M. Farooq was already sold to a third party and without disclosing the same, the said S.M. Farooq entered into an agreement of sale with her. Therefore, she cancelled the agreement of sale and started searching for suitable lands and after selecting three such lands, she showed them to the Field Investigation Officer of the Corporation for inspection and thereafter she entered into an agreement of lease dated 20.4.2004 for 25 years with the landlord whose land was selected by the Field Investigation officer for the purpose of construction of the godown and show room. The lease agreement dated 20.4.2004 was handed over to the Corporation and third respondent entered into with an agreement for the LPG distributorship on 13.7.2004 and on and from 14.7.2004 she has been carrying on the business of distributorship of Bharat Gas in Tirunelveli Town, covering 15 Km. radius and supplying gas to customers numbering 15,000.

4. While so, one C.M. Rajan who stood second in the interview for the selection of distributorship, filed W.P. No. 6347 of 2004 challenging her selection for the distributorship. Though a status quo order was passed by this Court on 27.4.2004, the same was vacated on 26.5.2004. Finally, the writ petition itself was disposed of by this Court with a direction to the Corporation to consider the complaint dated 3.10.2006 given by the said C.M. Rajan within a reasonable time. In his complaint, C.M. Rajan stated that the applicant had committed four irregularities for getting the LPG distributorship, which are as follows:

1. She submitted false land documents.

2. Shesubmitted false certificate showing her work experience when she did not work in any company.

3. She submitted a fake bank balance statement and

4. She obtained forged plan from Reddiarpatty Panchayat for construction of LPG godown.

5. To these complaints, she submitted a detailed explanation, but the third respondent sent a show cause notice dated 12.12.2007 seeking her explanation for the same old complaints and asking her as to why her distributorship agreement dated 13.7.2004 should not be terminated by invoking Clause 28.1 of the distributorship agreement. To this show cause, she submitted a detailed explanation on 2.1.2008 and thereafter she appeared in person before the third respondent and explained her stand. But, the third respondent by order dated 18.1.2008 terminated her distributorship agreement and challenging the same, she filed a writ petition in W.P. N