A petitioner not participating in a selection process lacks locus standi to challenge a dealership, but deficiencies in the investigation warrant a fresh inquiry into the allegations.

ORDER :

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order in Ref.No. CBERO/MVR/RET dated 22.12.2020 passed by 3rd respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to terminate the Retail Outlet Dealership issued to the 5th respondent for her act of playing fraud in getting the dealership and take necessary penal action, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 10.08.2020 and pass further or other orders as this Court deem it fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

The petitioner has instituted this writ petition on 06.06.2022 challenging an order passed on 22.12.2020 (impugned order). The impugned order has been passed by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL) rejecting the petitioner’s complaint levelling allegations as against R5 of impropriety in making an application for dealership for a petrol pump.

2. R5 had been awarded a Retail Outlet Dealership for a petrol pump at Thalavaipettai, Erode District (pump/petrol pump). R5 had applied under Open Category on 15.12.2010 and pursuant to an interview conducted by the Selection Committee on 21.12.2011, had been selected for the dealership. She has, since then, been running the petrol pump in the name and style of ‘Lakshmi Priya Agencies’ at Bavani – Sathy Main Road, Thalavaipettai, Erode.

3. Mr.S.Shrish, learned counsel, for Mr.N.Manokaran, learned counsel, who appears for the petitioner, confirms that the petitioner was not an applicant for the dealership of the stated petrol pump. However, he had come to know that there were certain discrepancies in the credentials of R5 and false information furnished to HPCL.

4. According to him, the application of R5 ought to have been rejected on the ground of the falsity of information furnished therein. One of the terms and conditions in the application is to the effect that the applicant was barred from making an application, if employed at the relevant point in time. Reference is made to Clause 18 of the Dealership Agreement. Then again, Clause 19.2 of the Brochure for Selection of Dealership, stipulates that furnishing of false information would be fatal to the consideration of the application itself.

5. According to the petitioner, R5 was employed as a teaching faculty/Assistant Professor in Vellalar College for Women (Autonomous), Thindal, Erode District (college), from 04.12.2006 onwards and had resigned only on 31.07.2020. In this connection, petitioner would rely upon the website of the college as well as the data provided by the college as uploaded in the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF - 2021) website. However, she had concealed this fact when applying for the subject dealership.

6. Petitioner would also draw attention to her income particulars as furnished in the income-tax returns to substantiate her employment. In addition, petitioner would allege that the husband of R5 was implicated in several criminal complaints which also, according to him, stands against petitioner’s credentials for selection. Hence a complaint came to be filed by him on 10.08.2020. Upon consideration of the allegations therein, HPCL has rejected the complaint.

7. Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali, learned counsel, appearing for HPCL would submit that detailed investigation had been carried out on the allegations of R5. Though they state that notice had been given to the petitioner on 23.09.2020 for an online hearing and the petitioner had not appeared, the petitioner would deny this. In the larger scheme of things, this point would not, in the view of the Court, be of much relevance.

8. On the allegation in regard to the employment of R5, HPCL has found that R5 was employed with the college between 2006 and 2008 and had resigned in May, 2008. Her salary was also only for this period. Her engagement with the college during 2006 – 2008 was on account of