SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(MP) 897

S.C.SHARMA
Pankaj Mantri – Appellant
Versus
Indian Oil Corporation, Bhopal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Amit Agrawal, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. B.L. Pavecha, Sr. Advocate , Mr. Yogesh Mittal, Advocate with him for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner before this Court has filed this present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 17-2-2012 passed by the Chief Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOC), by which the petitioner's selection as a retail outlet dealer has been cancelled.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that an advertisement was issued on 21-9-2011 inviting applications for appointment of dealers in respect of retail outlets of IOC and the petitioner did submit an application on 31-10-2011. Petitioner has further stated that as per the advertisement, certain mandatory conditions were mentioned and in the column No. 5, the total approximate capital investment was fixed as Rs. 25 lacs and as per column No. 6 the necessary working capital required was Rs. 16 lacs. It has been further stated that as per Clause 8 read with Clause 8 (b), a sum of Rs. 2 lacs was required to be deposited as security deposit after the incumbent is selected as a dealer. Petitioner has further stated that he has submitted all minute details in respect of financial capability along w






































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top