The court held that a lease for land with multiple co-owners must be executed by all co-owners to be valid, and a declaration of non-agricultural use does not imply legal partition of the land.

JUDGMENT :

Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. Present writ petition has been filed, seeking to assail the order dated 4.3.2025 passed by respondent no.4/Territory Manager (Retail) Mathura in terms of which, the petitioners have been found to be ineligible for allotment of Retail-outlet (Petrol Pump) dealership.

3. As per the pleadings in the writ petition, the petitioners applied for allotment of dealership of a Retail-outlet (Petrol Pump), location at Village Nagla Santhal, Tehsil Kheragarh, on Kheragarh to Saipu Road, District Agra, in response to a notification dated 28.6.2023 issued by respondent no.2-Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.[BPCL]

4. The land which had been offered for the purpose of establishing the retail-outlet was stated to have been obtained by the petitioners on lease executed by one Vijay Singh, being part of Khasra No.177, measuring an area of 1332 sq. meters, situated at Village Nagla, Santhal, Tehsil-Kheragarh, District Agra.

5. The documents uploaded by the petitioners and the information provided by them in the application were evaluated by the Scrutiny Committee of respondent no.2-BPCL and it was found that the application did not meet 'Dealer Selection Guidelines 2023' and, therefore, the application was rejected by means of an e-mail dated 16.8.2024, wherein the reason for rejection was mentioned as 'there are multiple co-owners of offered khasra no.177 as per uploaded copy of khatauni, whereas lease deed is done from only one co-owner'.

6. The petitioners, at this stage, filed a writ petition, being Writ-C No.40696 of 2024, which was disposed of by means of an order dated 16.1.2025, directing respondent no.2-BPCL to decide the representation dated 23.8.2024 submitted by the petitioners with regard to their claim.

7. Pursuant to the aforesaid order passed in Writ-C No.40696 of 2024, the representation of the petitioners was examined and in terms of an order dated 4.3.2025, the petitioners have been held to be ineligible for allotment of retail-outlet dealership. Aggrieved by the said order dated 4.3.2025, the present writ petition has been filed.

8. It has been argued on behalf of the petitioners that the selection of the petitioners has been cancelled only on the ground that the lease deed ought to have been executed by all the co-tenure holders, whereas the land in question, which was offered by them, had already been partitioned by an order dated 20.12.2019, declaring the share of Vijay Singh, the person who had executed the lease deed in favour of the petitioners. It is urged that as per terms of sub-section (4) of Section 80 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 [Code, 2006], once the declaration has been made under Section 80 , that would presuppose that the land in question had already been divided/partitioned in accordance with the provisions of law.

9. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos.2 to 4 has controverted the aforesaid argument by submitting that the order dated 20.12.2019 has been passed under Section 80 (1) of the Code, 2006, which is only with regard to the declaration of the non-agricultural use ofthe land, and cannot be construed to be an order by which, the land in question could be said to have been partitioned.

10. It has been pointed out that as per clause no.4 (vi) of the ‘Selection Brochure’ for Selection of Dealers, if the offered land is on long term lease and there are multiple co-owners, then such lease deed should have been executed by all the co-owners of the offered plot. In the instant case, the lease deed, having not been executed by all the co-owners, the same is to be treated as invalid for the purpose of selection of dealers.

11. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

12. The Selection Brochure for selection of dealers contains a clear stipulation under Clause No.4 (vi) that where the offered land is on long term lease and there a