A state entity's decision to reject a dealership application based on objective criteria set in an advertisement is valid if the entity uses its own established measurement mechanism, especially when the applicant has signed the findings of such a survey.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED LETTER DATED 04-05-2024 AS PER ANNEXURE-G REF. NO.IOC 16945225807938 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AND ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO AWARD OF RETAIL OUTLET DEALERSHIP FOR THE LOCATION AT SL.NO.647 WITHIN 2 KM FROM BASAVESHWARA CIRCLE TOWARDS AINAPUR (BELAGAVI DISTRICT) ROAD ON STATE HIGHWAY, IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AND GRANT SUCH OTHER FURTHER RELIEFS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES INCLUDING COSTS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

ORAL ORDER

The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:

“PRAYER

Wherefore the petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to

i. Call for records pertaining to the case from the respondent No.1.

ii. Issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari to quash the impugned letter dated:04-05-2024 as per Annexure-G Ref. No.IOC 16945225807938 issued by the respondent No.1.

iii. Issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 to award of Retail Outlet Dealership for the location at Sl.No.647 within 2 KM from Basaveshwara Circle towards Ainapur (Belagavi District) Road on State Highway, in favour of the petitioner.

iv. Grant such other further reliefs as this hon’ble court deems fit in the circumstances including costs in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. The facts of the case are that respondent No.1 has issued an advertisement on 28.06.2023 inviting applications for award of Retail Outfit Dealership at various locations in Karnataka. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner applied for the Retail Outlet Dealership for the location at Sl.No.647 within 2 KM from Basaveshwara Circle towards Ainapur Road on State Highway. The land evaluation committee visited the site situated in RS No.1619/6A offered by the petition for the establishment of retail outlet on 21.11.2023. Thereafter, the petitioner has approached the Assistant Executive Engineer PWD Sub-Division, Athani and he has issued a letter dated 09.02.2024 stating that the property is within a distance of 1.995 KM. The said letter was submitted by the petitioner to respondent No.1 authority. It is stated that on 04.05.2024, respondent No.1 issued the impugned letter informing the petitioner that the candidature has been found ineligible for the reason that the land is not in the advertised stretch. It is stated that the impugned letter dated 04.05.2024 as per Annexure-G is contrary to the guidelines for the selection of distributorship and is in violation of principles of natural justice and the respondent No.1 has not at all given any opportunity of being heard. Hence, the petitioner has come up before this Court.

3. The impugned letter is dated 04.05.2024 and this writ petition is filed on 13.02.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner relying on the letter that is issued by the PWD submits that the petitioner’s land is within 2 KM radius from Basaveshwara Circle, as such, the respondents ought not to have considered the case of the petitioner for the dealership.

4. Detailed objections are filed by the respondent. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that they are not bound by any commun