AMIR KUMAR MISHRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the prayer to issue a mandamus directing the respondents to decide the pending representation. A further prayer has also been made in the writ petition to direct the respondents not to issue final allotment letter for retail outlet dealership for village Pasna, Tehsil Koraon on Meja to Koran M.D.R. Road, Prayagraj in favour of the respondent No.4.

(2.) Facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd./respondent No.2 issued an advertisement on 14.10.2014 inviting online applications for allotment of regular and rural retail outlet dealership through draw of lots for various Districts in the State of U.P. The petitioner has also submitted his online application form for allotment of retail outlet dealership and he was allotted a retail outlet dealership in the location namely village Pasna, Tehsil Koraon, District Prayagraj. In this regard, a letter of intent was also issued in his favour by respondent-corporation on 25.08.2018. It is stated that retail outlet dealership of the petitioner is situated at M.D.R. 121, Sirsa-Koraon Road between milestone 24 kms.to 26 kms. The petitioner stated his retail outlet dealership in the name and style J.K.Automobiles, at Village Pasna, Tehsil Koraon, Meja Road, Prayagraj. It is further stated that the retail outlet dealership of the petitioner is situated in a rural area where the sale of petroleum product is not very good. It is stated that respondent No.4 namely Sri Vivek Shukla, started the construction of boundary wall of his petrol pump in village Pasna and during the course of inquiry, the petitioner came to know that Sri Vivek Shukla has also allotted retail outlet dealership in his favour by respondent Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. In this regard, the petitioner further came to know that an advertisement was also issued by the respondent-Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. on 24.12.2018 in which details of petrol pump, which was allotted in favour of respondent No.4, was mentioned at Serial No.2052. It is further stated that in spite of best efforts, the petitioner could not get the copy of the letter of intent issued in favour of respondent No.4 and when the respondent No.4 started construction of boundary wall of the retail outlet dealership, he came to know regarding his selection for location in question.

(3.) After the petitioner came to know about the aforesaid facts, he made a representation dated 22.08.2020 addressed to the Chief Regional Manager, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd./respondent No.3 vide registered post on 24.08.2020. Since no action was taken as such, a letter in the shape of reminder was also made by the petitioner before respondent No.3 on 12.09.2020 and when no action was taken on the same, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.