Competitive harm does not constitute legal injury under 'damnum sine injuria'; disputes involving pure questions of fact should not be adjudicated in writ jurisdiction.

JUDGMENT :

SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.

1. Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 5 and 6 and Sri Komal Mehrotra, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 4.

2. The controversy involved in the present writ petition is that the petitioner is an authorized dealer of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited having a retail outlet at Arazi No. 430, Village Kakrait, Pargana-Narwan, TehsilSadar, District Chandauli and is carrying on the business since 14.7.2020.

3. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited-respondent no.2 had published an advertisement on 28.6.2023 amongst others for grant of Rural Retail Outlet Dealership at the location Village Kakrait to Kandawa (including both villages) on Kakrait to Kandawa Road (not on National Highway), District Chandauli for the reserved category of scheduled caste. In this regard the respondent no.7 had proposed to set up a retail outlet on land measuring 2091.078 square meters comprised in Arazi No. 412, Mauza Kakrait, Pargana-Narwan, Tehsil-Sadar, District Chandauli.

4. The respondent no. 7 was selected for the said outlet on 27.12.2023. Subsequent thereto the respondent no.4 had issued the letter of intent dated 7.6.2024 in favour of respondent no.7 in respect of the aforesaid retail outlet.

5. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the new retail outlet has not been established at the location advertised and petitioner is already running a retail outlet since 14.07.2020 and the same is hardly 200 meters away from Arazi No. 412 where the retail outlet of the respondent no.2-corporation has been awarded to the respondent no.7 and such an allotment is in violation of the Uttar Pradesh Guidelines for Issuance of NOC for Setting-up Fuel Stations along U.P. P.W.D. Road-2022

6. Under these circumstances, the petitioner had filed a representation dated 18.6.2024 before respondent no.5 essentially stating that the aforesaid retail outlet was to be located on Kakrait-Kandawa Road but the same is located on Jamania-Kakrait Road which is not in accordance with advertisement and also that the selection is in contravention to the aforesaid Guidelines-2022.

7. However, as no decision was taken on the representation so made by the petitioner by the respondent no.5, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by filing Writ-C No. 23482 of 2024 and the same was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 22.10.2024 thereby directing the respondent no.5 to decide the representation of the petitioner after granting opportunity of hearing to all the concerned including the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of the order.

8. In pursuance to the directions of this Court the respondent no.5 vide order dated 9.6.2025, morefully annexed as Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition, had rejected the representation of the petitioner. The petitioner has filed Writ-C No. 19813 of 2025 challenging the order dated 9.6.2025 passed by the respondent no.5.

9. The petitioner has filed another Writ-C No. 20276 of 2025 challenging the order dated 18.6.2025 issued by District Magistrate, Chandauli-respondent no.5 inter-alia granting no objection certificate to the respondent no.2-corporation to set up a retail outlet at Arazi No. 412, Village Kakrait, Pargana-Narwan, Tehsil-Sadar, District Chandauli.

10. Thereafter the petitioner has also filed Writ-C No.33099 of 2025 seeking a writ of mandamus directing Deputy Chief Controller of Explosive, Allahabad (respondent no.2 in the said writ petition) to decide the objections of the petitioner dated 23.7.2025 against the grant of no objection certificate by the Department of Explosive in respect of the retail outlet to be established by respondent no.7 at Arazi No. 412 in Village Kakrait, Pargana-Narwan, Tehsil-Sadar, District Chandauli.

11. At the very outset, learned counsel for the states that the petitioner is essentially aggrieved by the order dated 9.6.2025 passed by the District Magistr