The court's role in a writ petition is to ensure that the material does not suffer any illegality on the face of it and to consider the findings of the 1st respondent backed by proper reasons.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 1st respondent in order dated 12.04.2010 and qaush the same and consequently to direct the respondent to set aside the allotment of petrol bunk at Pavithram Village in favour of the 2nd respondent and allot the same to the petitioner.)

1. The subject matter of challenge in this writ petition pertains to the order passed by the 1st respondent dated 12.04.2010 and the petitioner has also sought for a consequential direction to direct the 1st respondent to allot the petrol bunk in favour of the petitioner.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he belongs to Schedule Caste community. The 1st respondent issued an advertisement on 10.02.2005, calling for applications for allotment of petrol bunk under various categories and the petitioner also applied for the same under the SC category. The petitioner made a representation on 24.07.2008, questioning the dealership granted in favour of the 2nd respondent. Since this representation was not considered, the petitioner filed W.P.No.18563 of 2008 and this writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 05.01.2010, directing the 1st respondent to consider the same within a stipulated time after affording opportunity to all parties concerned.

3. The 1st respondent through the impugned proceedings dated 12.04.2010, rejected the representation made by the petitioner and thereby, the dealership that was given in favour of the 2nd respondent was confirmed. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.

4. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit and the relevant portions in the counter affidavit are extracted hereunder :

(a) After the commissioning of the dealership similar complaints were received from one Shri V. Rathinavel (brother of Shri. V. Thirugnanam). One committee comprising of two senior level managers from different department, investigated the matter. The findings of the committee has been detailed under para 4 of the impugned order dated 12.04.2010. It was concluded by the committee that the retail outlet dealership is personally managed by Ms. Amudha and she only is in complete control and management of the retail outlet dealership.

(b) After the receipt of the representation dated 24.07.2008 filed by petitioner, the allegations were once again investigated. The investigation team at the time of investigation found that RO is selling 30 KL MS and 60 KL HSD per month approx. and is personally being managed by the DPSL signatory Ms. A. Amudha with a team of 2 DSMs in the day shift and 3 DSMs working in the night shift. The investigation team verified documents such as Retail Outlet Inspection Reports, Technicians Report, SGS Authentix Marker Test Report, Invoices, Deputy Inspector of Labour's Stamping Certificate all of various dates and observed that all the records were signed by the DPSL signatory i.e., Ms. A. Amudha herself. It was further observed that the Sales Tax Registration RC No.3102776 was in the name of DPSL signatory i.e., Ms. A. Amudha. The bank account of the impugned dealership firm in Tamilnad Mercantile Bank, Pavithrampudur Branch was maintained in the name of M/s.Shri Venkateshwara Traders with name of Proprietix as Ms. A. Amudha. At the time of enquiry it was submitted by Ms. A. Amudha that one Shri. Rajkumar has been assisting her in the initial days of Retail Outlet commissioning however on account of his malpractice of swindling Retail Outlet cash he was removed from Retail Outlet's activities. Thereafter, Ms. A. Amudha sought assistance of the retail outlet land owner Shri. V. Thirugnanam who was also removed on account of misappropriation of funds by him. It was submitted by Ms. A. Amudha that said Shri. Rajkumar on the pretext of helping her obtained her signatures in blank sheets and used the same to create false documents. In view of the enquiries mad