RAJINDER KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed to challenge the validity of order dated 26.03.2013 passed by respondent No. 4 whereby the Retail Outlet Dealership in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled and he has been declared as "not qualified".

(2.) In short, the Indian Oil Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the "Corporation") issued an advertisement on 18.09.2011 for the selection of Petrol/Diesel Kisan Seva Kendra (Rural Retail Outlet) Dealers (hereinafter referred to as the "retail outlet dealer") at various places in Delhi and Haryana. Presently, the outlet in question is at village Hanspur, District Fatehabad under the open category. There were two persons who had applied for appointment of retail outlet dealer on the aforesaid site. They were interviewed on 28.12.2011 at the Hisar Divisional Office and the petitioner was awarded 79.01 marks, whereas the other candidate, namely, Ravinder Kumar, secured 74.15 marks. On 25.06.2012, the Corporation issued a Letter of Intent to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for NOCs from the various departments and the District Revenue Officer issued the NOC on 19.07.2012, District Town Planner on 06.08.2012, Fire Brigade on 25.07.2012, Food and Civil Supplies Controller on 26.07.2012, DHBVNL on 27.07.2012 and on 13.08.2012, the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) submitted a detailed report to the District Magistrate, Fatehabad in regard to ownership of the land in question measuring 06 Kanal 19 Marlas. On 17.01.2013, the District Magistrate, Fatehabad issued the NOC for installation of a retail outlet. According to the petitioner, the entire process was over with the issuance of NOC by the District Magistrate, Fatehabad on 17.01.2013. On 26.03.2013, respondent No. 4 conveyed to the petitioner that he has been declared as "not qualified" with 56.51 marks on the basis of the revised mark sheet, which was sent to the petitioner as well. It is also alleged that in the meantime, Balwinder Kumar and Bhupender Kumar both sons of Gian Chand, residents of Hanspur, District Fatehabad filed a suit for permanent injunction against the petitioner and the Corporation. In that suit, the Corporation filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for dismissal of the suit on the ground that there was no cause of action. The said suit was ultimately withdrawn by the said Balwinder Kumar and Bhupender Kumar. It is also pleaded that before the interviews were held, field verification was conducted by the Corporation and found the petitioner to be the owner in regard to the land in question offered by him as a "firm offer".

(3.) In the background of the aforesaid facts and circumstances narrated in the petition, counsel for the petitioner has argued that once the interview was held on 28.12.2011 in which the petitioner secured 79.01 marks over and above the other candidate who had secured 74.15 marks and the interview was held after the field verification of the land and the NOC was issued by the District Magistrate, a complaint filed after six month could not have been entertained in view of Clause 18(A) of the brochure issued by the Corporation for selection of the retail outlet dealer. Clause 18 (A) of the brochure reads as under: -