SUNITA RANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner would refer to the policy which was issued though a gazette notification on 2.7.1992 providing for reservation of 25% to SC/ST and making further provision for diluting the requirement of offer of land and buildings for locating the LPG facilities. The policy took note of the fact that the dealers/distributor under the SC/ST found it difficult to arrange funds required for commissioning of the distributorship and as a consequence, the allottees were forced to enter into arrangements with wealthier persons resulting in becoming only nominal owners. The consideration, therefore, yielded to the following result.

(2.) There are two objections taken by the petitioner as being in conflict with the policy decision issued by the Union through the department of Petroleum industries, namely, assignment of 25% reservation for SC/ST applicants and provision for financial assistance for establishing necessary infrastructure including the land and building for locating the LPG cash distributorship.

(3.) The counsel for the respondents explains that the percentage of 25% was reduced to 22-1/2%, since additional reservation was made to the extent of 25% for the OBC and, therefore, a marginal reduction in percentage of reservation for SC/ST to be undertaken. Even with regard to the financial assistance, the original policy providing for the Corporation to identify the property and establish the infrastructure and later collect the investment cost over 100 installments was given up only because of the difficulty in securing the property by the oil companies themselves. The petitioner on his part would explain difficulty in identifying the property and taking on lease before hand when there was no sure guarantee for allotment that would render the policy of assistance even in the altered situation to be unworkable.