LAWS(CAL)-2025-1-87

BAPI HALDAR Vs. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION

Decided On January 13, 2025
Bapi Haldar Appellant
V/S
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Indian Oil Corporation published an advertisement inviting applications for appointment of LPG Distributor in the vacancy location at Jhilli, under Murshidabad District. Petitioner has applied for the said vacancy by filing a prescribing application. Petitioner was selected in the draw of tots and IOCL has issued letter of intent (LOI) in favour of the petitioner. It appears for application that petitioner offered plot No. 4255 and 4256 for construction of LPG-Godown- cum showroom. However, it is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has applied for the license from West Bengal Fire and Emergency Services in respect of three plots. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the owner of the LR plot Nos. 4253,4255,4256 and 4258 of said Mouza. All LR plots and land are adjacent to each other. Petitioner, could not restricted construction of godown to plot no. 4255 and 4256. LR record of right of LR plot No. 4256 was not available. Thus petitioner had to construct the godown offered to additional plots i.e. 4253 and 4258. It is the further case of the petitioner that during construction of godown only some portion of the plot No. 4258 was covered. No private person was deprived or not raised any dispute regarding the construction of godown over said 04 plots of land. It is the further case of the petitioner that the construction of godown over the additional plots of lands were well aware to the sales officers of the respondent. It is the further case of the petitioner that he duly paid Rs.1,80,000.00 in total for security deposit for commissioning of the LPG Distribution and also cleared Rs.1,85,000.00 as refilling cost. Petitioner says that the Oil Company/Respondent has received the entire amount without any objection. However the petitioner has submitted an application of 15th of January 2021 for using alternate land but the respondent authority has issued a show cause to the petitioner on 17th of December 2021 asking him to provide satisfactory reply. On 14th of March 2022, petitioner communicated the respondent for conversion plot 4255 is underway but the respondent authority has cancelled the LOI on 2/5/2022.

(2.) Hence this writ petition.

(3.) The IOCL contested the writ petition by using affidavits. It is the case of the IOCL that initially petitioner offered the land comprising of LR plot No. 4255 and 4356; thereafter he constructed godown over some additional plots No. 4253 and 4358. The report of the concerned officers of the IOCL has specifically mentioned that the petitioner has constructed the godown over plot No. 4255, 4356, 4253 and 4358. Before making construction, the petitioner has not obtained any permission or never informed the IOCL. It is the further case of the petitioner that the conduct of the petitioner is "de hors" to the condition laid down in the brochure.