DIBAKAR SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No. 5.

(2.) THE petitioner has filed this writ application challenging the legality of the order passed by the Collector, Bhadrak on 6.3.2006 in Annexure -5 appointing opposite party No. 5 as Kerosene Oil Sub -wholesaler at Raipur under Chandabali Block.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the State with reference to the counter affidavit filed submitted that there are allegations against the petitioner with regard to distribution of kerosene such as charging higher price and supplying less kerosene. Apart from above, taking into consideration the population of the Grama Panchayat under the said Block and geographical barrier, the opposite party No,5 has been appointed.