Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Saumitra Dayal Singh, Surendra Singh - I, JJ.
Rahul Singh v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. land ownership criteria under brochure for allotment. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 6 , 9) |
| 2. consent letters cannot replace lease deeds from all co-owners. (Para 5 , 10 , 12 , 15) |
| 3. application of guidelines leads to rejection of non-compliant applications. (Para 7 , 8 , 14 , 16) |
| 4. final decision on merit dismissal confirmed. (Para 17) |
1. Heard Shri Yash Padia, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for the Oil Corporation and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. Challenge has been raised to the order dated 14.02.2024 passed by the Divisional Retail Sale Head - respondent No. 3, rejecting the petitioners grievance petition, arising from earlier rejection of his provisional allotment.
3. Undeniably, the petitioner applied for allotment of retail outlet under the 2023 guidelines of the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as IOCL). The application itself was filed on 14.08.2023. The land offered for the allotment does not belong to the petitioner or his family members. The petitioner applied on the strength of lease deed executed by co - owner of plot bearing Gata No. 191, namely Santosh Kumar. At the same time, it is undisput
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
