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

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
CHALLAGALI CHAITANYA KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
THE UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


ORDER:

rd The 3 respondent had issued a notification dated 25.11.2018 inviting applications for selection of Retail Outlet Dealers in various locations including the location mentioned at Sl.No.746 in the notification, which is “Chinarikatla Junction (after 1 km from NH Junction) towards Kanigiri road (within 3 kms) on NH-565. The applicant obtained registered lease agreement for the land situated at 3.4 kms from NH Junction and filed his application. The petitioner was informed by a letter dated 12.02.2019 that he was qualified for draw of lots for selection, which was to be held on 22.02.2019. Thereafter, he was informed by a letter dated th

27.06.2019 of the 4 respondent that he was the only eligible candidate, and as such, declared as selected even without any draw of lots.

2. After selection, the petitioner had submitted all the documents sought by the respondents. On 21.11.2019, the petitioner was informed that the Land Evaluation Committee would visit the site proposed by the petitioner on 30.11.2019. This site was inspected on that day. Thereafter, there was a consequent visit on 28.12.2019. After these th two visits, there was no information from the 4 respondent despite vari

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