Back
P MEHABOOB BASH S/O P ANIFSAB – Appellant
Versus
HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD – Respondent
WP 100976/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2021
BEFORE
THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO.100976/2021 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
P MEHABOOB BASH S/O P ANIFSAB,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/O IBRAHIMPURJI VILLAGE,
SINDANUR ROAD, BAJODI POST,
SIRUGUPPA TALUK,
BALLARI DISTRICT-583121.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI GANGADHAR J M, ADV.)
AND :
1.
HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,
(GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ENTERPRISE),
REGISTERED OFFICE 17, JAMSHEDJI TATA ROAD,
MUMBAI-400020.
2.
THE CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER,
(RETAIL HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.),
BALLARI RETAIL REGIONAL OFFICE,
II FLOOR, SLV GURUDATTA TOWER,
III CROSS, GANDHI NAGAR,
BALLARI-583103.
3.
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION OFFICE,
JRC EXTENSION, V CROSS,
CHITRADURGA-577501.
4.
GEETA VANI MUMMALANENI
W/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
REG.NO.15446346821430.
2
5.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560 001.
& RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MALLIKARJUN C.BASAREDDY, ADV. FOR R.1 TO R.3)
(BY SRI J.M.ANIL KUMAR ADV. FOR R.4)
(BY SRI SHIVAPRABHU S.HIREMATH, AGA FOR R.5)
THIS WRIT IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING THIS COURT TO ISSUE
APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER, DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF
CERTIORARI QUASHING THE LETTER OF INTENT DATED
9.2.2021
BEARING
NO.BLYRO/VBS/RET/ADVT-2018/690
(ANNEXURE-H) ISSUED BY THE 2ND AND SUCH OTHER RELIEFS.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
: ORDER :
This writ petition is directed against the letter of
intent issued by the 2nd respondent in favour of 4th
respondent by order dated 09.02.2021.
2.
The case of the petitioner is that, respondent
Nos.1 and 2 were called for applications for allocations of
Petrol Bunk retail outlet dealership within 5 kilometers
from Siruguppa towards Dadesugur on National Highway
150A.
As
per
the
advertisement
published
on
3
25.11.2018, the petitioner has made an application vide
Annexure-A.
3.
After verifying the application filed by the
petitioners along with applications filed by other persons,
the Petrol Bunk dealership has been allotted in favour of
4th respondent and letter of intent has been issued.
Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before
this Court.
4.
Sri
Gangadhar
J.M.,
learned
counsel
appearing for the petitioner submits that, as per the
notification issued by respondent Nos.1 and 2, the Petrol
Bunk retail outlet dealership has to be established within
5 kilometers from Siruguppa towards Dadesugur on
National Highway 150A. The property which is identified
by the 4th respondent is beyond 5 kilometers from
Siruguppa, the same is contrary to the notification
issued by respondent Nos.1 and 2. Therefore, letter of
intent issued is, contrary to the notification and the
same is unsustainable and hence he sought for allowing
the writ petition.
4
5.
Per contra, Sri Mallikarjun C.Basareddy,
learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 & 2 has
contended that, allotment has been made in favour of
respondent No.4, after the Field Verification Committee
has conducted the spot inspection. After conducting
measurement, they have found that the site identified by
the 4th respondent for establishment of Petrol Bunk retail
outlet is within the 5 kilometers. Hence they have issued
a letter of intent to respondent No.4 on 09.02.2021.
Therefore, there is no illegality in the allotment of the
Petrol Bunk retail outlet dealership in favour of the 4th
respondent and hence he sought for dismissal of the writ
petition.
6.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the
parties. Perused the writ papers.
7.
The only dispute in this case is that, whether
the site identified by respondent No.4 for establishment
of Petrol Bunk retail outlet is within 5 kilometers from
Siruguppa or not. In order to find ou
