BIKRAMJIT SINGHA Vs. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the writ petitions are connected and have been filed by the same petitioner in connection with appointment of Rajiv Gandhi Gramin LPG Vitrak (RGGVL). In fact, the second writ petition is an off-shoot of the first and accordingly both of the writ petitions were analogously heard and are disposed of by this common judgment and order.

(2.) To address the issues, it is necessary to put on record the facts of the cases in brief.

(3.) The respondent - Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) had published an advertisement dtd. 29/12/2013 in the newspaper "Dainik Jugashankha" for selection and appointment of RGGVL. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner, who claims to be eligible had submitted his candidature along with other candidates. The petitioner had claimed that he is a permanent resident of village Sudarshanpur Part 2 of Hailkandi district. The petitioner claims to have been found qualified for draw of lots which was scheduled on 6/11/2014. However, the petitioner alleges that in violation of the procedure, the respondent no. 5 was selected which was conveyed vide letter dtd. 7/11/2014. The petitioner alleges that the said respondent no. 5 was a resident of village Rajayeswapur Part 5, Muktacharra which is outside the Sudarshanpur Kalacharra Gaon Panchayat area. The principal ground of challenge is that the draw of lots is done in a chronological manner where preference is given to the candidates who are from the same Gaon Panchayat village whereas the respondent no. 5 herein is from a different village and therefore, the respondent no. 5 should not have come within the zone of consideration.