IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
T. Chandrasekaran - Appellant
Versus
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Rep. By Regional Manager, Chennai & Others - Respondent
W.P. No. 37699 of 2015 & MP Nos. 1 & 2 of 2015
Decided On : 29-08-2022
LPG Distributorship - Location Requirement - [Article 226] - [Territory Manager-LPG v. R.K. Pradeep Raj (2015) 6 CTC 138] - The court considered the importance of a location fixed for granting distributorship and emphasized the distinction between 'location' and 'locality'. It held that the location specified in the notification must cater to the needs of the people living in and around the said location, and misrepresentation of the location renders the applicant ineligible. The court relied on the clarification given by the Tahsildar to determine the eligibility of the petitioner for distributorship.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner applied for LPG distributorship in the OBC (GP) category at Redhills location, but the 2nd respondent rejected the application on the ground that the showroom did not fall within the Redhills location.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the location of the showroom did not meet the requirements of the notification, and the rejection of the application by the 2nd respondent was justified.
Issues: Eligibility for LPG distributorship under the OBC (GP) category at Redhills location.
Ratio Decidendi: The location specified in the notification must cater to the needs of the people living in and around the said location, and misrepresentation of the location renders the applicant ineligible.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was dismissed, and the respondent Corporation was directed to immediately call for applications for granting LPG distributorship in the Redhills location.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records relating to Order No.CHEN:LPG:REDHILLS: dated 12.9.2015 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to award LPG Distributorship in favour of the petitioner under the OBC (GP) category for Red Hills location.)
1. The subject matter of challenge in the present Writ Petition pertains to the order dated 12.09.2015 issued by the 2nd respondent and for a consequential direction to the respondents to award LPG distributorship in favour of the petitioner under the OBC (GP) category.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent Corporation offered LPG distributorship under various categories at various locations in the State of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry during the year 2013-14. The petitioner applied for LPG distributorship in the category of OBC(GP) at Redhills location by enclosing all the relevant documents and by paying the necessary fees. The petitioner also entered into a lease agreement for a period of 16 years with respect to the showroom admeasuring 4.5 Meters X 3.35 Meters and godown measuring 25 Meters X 30 Meters for the purpose of obtaining LPG distributorship. The showroom was situated in Padiyanallur, Redhills and the godown was situated in Ponneri.
3. The further case of the petitioner is that he was declared as the sole candidate selected in the category of OBC (GP) for Redhills location and he was called upon to pay the necessary fee for field verification of credentials. The field verification took place and the petitioner was awaiting for being awarded with the LPG distributorship.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent through the impugned order dated 12.09.2015, informed the petitioner that he was declared ineligible on the ground that the showroom is not as per the requirement mentioned in the advertisement and that the showroom is not within the Redhills location. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed before this Court.
5. The respondent Corporation has filed a counter affidavit. The relevant portions in the counter affidavit are extracted hereunder:
“Continuing the verification process (FVC) the Officer nominated for FVC also found the Show-room mentioned in the application/ Lease Deed dated 17.10.2013 Sl. No. 115/10 A 2B, Padiyanallur Village, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District is in Padiyanallur Village and not in the advertised location REDHILLS.
As per Schedule to the Lease Deed dated 17.10.2013, it is clear the Show-room is in Tiruvallur District, Ponneri Taluk, Padiyanallur Village S.No.115 / 10A 2B. Petitioner is clearly aware his Show-room is not in the advertised location.
Petitioner is also aware that his Show-room is NOT in the advertised location REDHILLS and that is the reason why in his Application Show Room Land Column, he has wantonly inducted the words Redhills Circle. Whereas in the Schedule to the Lease Deed, it is clearly mentioned Padiyanallur.
To confirm from the Competent State Government Authority vide letter dated 04.02.015, Corporation requested Tahshildar, Madhavaram Taluk to clarify whether the locations Redhills and Padiyanallur in Madhavaram Taluk are the same. Tahsildar Madhavaram Taluk clarified in his letter dated 06.02.2015 that
(1) Redhillsis a separate Village coming underNaravarikuppam Town Panchayat MadhavaramTaluk
(2) Padiyanallur Village is not covered under Madhavaram Taluk.
By letter dated 09-02-2015, the Corporation requested the Tahsildar, Ponneri Taluk to clarify whether the locations Redhills and Padiyanallur in Ponneri Taluk are the same.
By letter dated 20-02-2015, TahsildharPonnneri Taluk clarified that
(1) Redhills Village is not covered under Ponneri Taluk.
(2) Padiyanallur Village is a separate Revenue Village coming under Solavaram Panchayat, Ponneri Taluk. From the confirmation from Tahs
Misrepresentation of the location specified in the notification renders the applicant ineligible for LPG distributorship.
An unsuccessful candidate has no right to challenge the selection of another without establishing their own eligibility and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.
The court emphasized the importance of compliance with the terms and conditions of the brochure and the need for approval before concluding a violation.
'Family Unit' in case of married person / applicant, shall consist of individual concerned, his/her Spouse and their unmarried son(s) / daughter(s). In case of unmarried person/ applicant, 'Family Un....
The rejection of an LPG distributorship application is valid if eligibility criteria related to land ownership, as per selection guidelines, are not met, and principles of natural justice are not vio....
The court emphasized the importance of verifying the eligibility of a candidate on the last date of the application and upheld the IOCL's discretion to accept alternative land due to the long delay 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.