NILRATAN GHOSH Vs. INDO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of the case may be described in brevity as follows :

(2.) The petitioner pursuant to an advertisement published in the Statesman dated 22nd Aug., 1981, applied for the dealership in respect of SKO/LDO in the respondent No. 1 Company at Garia for UG Category. Subsequently, on or about 1st March, 1982, the interview was conducted. The respondent No. 1 Company called upon the petitioner for submitting these following documents :

(3.) It has been claimed by the petitioner that immediately after the receipt of the letter from the Company, since he was seriously ill and not in a position to further negotiate as required by the Company. So, it refused to issue dealership licence to him. By letter dated 24th Feb., 1992, the petitioner had again sought for an interview with the authority and sent a registered notice through learned lawyer Mr. Majumdar but the Company had however, reiterated their stand and reply was sent through their advocate Mr. Alok Kumar Ghosh. Therefore, the petitioner being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said letter filed an application under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India which was, eventually disposed of by the Honourable Mr. Justice Umesh Banerjee (as he then was) by an order dated 6th Aug., 1983, inter alia, directing the respondent that as and when new letter of Intent would be issued in respect of dealership licence for the same place, the petitioner's case may be considered sympathetically. It has been further clarified that in the event, the petitioner would act in terms of the advertisement then only question of consideration of the petitioner's prayer would arise and not otherwise.