Hon’ble S.U. Khan, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioner is an influential person as admitted by himself in Para-26 of the writ petition, which is quoted below:

“That the petitioner meanwhile met the then Minister and approached the then Chief Minister through some legislators known to the petitioner. The Chief Minister’s Secretariat and the Minister’s office wrote several letters to the then Vice Chairman of the respondent No. 2 directing him to implement the order passed by the State Government (respondent No. 1) and to send them the compliance report. Realising that the matter could not be delayed any further, the respondent No. 2 issued a letter dated 19.11.1987, to the effect that the plot is allotted to the petitioner @ Rs. 2000/- per square metre.”

(Respondent No. 2 is Kanpur Development Authority.)

3. To be influential means to be rich. In view of this, the assertion in Para-3 of the writ petition that “Bharat Petroleum Corporation with a view to provide certain services under the Social Objective Scheme based on 20-Point Programme, invited applications for a motor-spirit (M.S.) retail outlet at Kanpur to be situate within two kilometers of either side of Baradevi Chauraha towards Govind Nagar Road, Kanpur and as the pump was reserved for unemployed engineering graduate, petitioner was selected for the grant of the retail out let after being selected in the interview is rather bewildering. It is not social objective. It is pure and simple capital favour granted to choicest person(s).

4. Unless the State adopts unabashedly commercial attitude while dealing with wealthy persons, it can neither have sufficient resources nor inclination to do social justice to really needy persons.

5. However, for the purposes of decision of this writ petition it is not relevant to decide as to why out of thousands (if not lacs) of unemployed engineers, petitioner was selected for grant of the retail outlet.

6. Letter of intent was issued in favour of the petitioner on 29.12.1982, copy of which is Annexure-I to the writ petition. Condition No. 1 was that petitioner should procure a suitable plot either purchased by him or leased to him for grant of 10 years with the dimensions of 46m X 30m (138 square meters) within a period of four months.

7. Neither in the said letter of intent there could be a direction nor in fact there was any direction that Kanpur Development Authority (K.D.A. in short) respondent No. 2 in this writ petition should grant requisite plot to the petitioner on lease. Petitioner or the State Government or any other authority could not compel the K.D.A. to allot requisite plot to the petitioner on the basis of the said letter of intent. Petitioner filed an application for allotment of suitable plot before K.D.A. on 17.1.1983 (Annexure-II to the writ petition). Petitioner sent several reminders as mentioned in Para-8 of the writ petition. Thereafter, petitioner personally met senior officers of K.D.A. (Para-9). K.D.A. identified plot No. 30-G, Sabzimandi, O-Block, Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur for allotment to the petitioner. The said plot was sought to be auctioned but proper persons did not come forward to participate in the auction hence auction was not held. State Government through letter dated 25.9.1984 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) directed the K.D.A. to allot the plot in question to competent person on payment of lease rent (Para-15 of the writ petition). Annexure-7 was written on the request of another Oil Company i.e. Indian Oil Corporation. In the said letter also reference is made to social objective and grant of suitable plot on lease rent, instead of auction, to those persons who had been selected by Oil Companies to run retail outlets. Here also the Court completely fails to understand as to why this double enormous concession was granted to very few selected people and that also in the name of social justice. Owner of a petrol pump is at least a millionaire if not multi-millionaire. Dire