REKHA RAGHUVANSHI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the action of respondent No.2 in selecting respondent No.4 for grant of petroleum dealership. It is prayed that dealership granted in favour of respondent No.4 be cancelled and in lieu thereof, the same be granted in favour of the petitioner.

(2.) SHRI N.S.Kirar, learned counsel for the petitioner, has advanced two fold submissions. (i) By drawing the attention of this Court on page 3 para ix of the writ petition, it is stated that the respondents have assigned/granted lower marks to the petitioner than her entitlement. He submits that in this paragraph, it is specifically mentioned that petitioner was entitled to get more marks but the respondents have erroneously given her less marks because of which the private respondent herein is shown more meritorious and secured a march over and above her and ultimately got the dealership. (ii) By placing reliance on para xi page 4, it is stated that entire selection, action and allotment of marks was a mala fide exercise and one Shri B.K.Behura, Regional Manager HPCL, Bhopal, was interested in the case of respondent No.4, hence, interference on the ground of mala fide is also prayed for.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Contention No.1