MEENA KUMARI Vs. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of the present writ petition and the connected one, i.e., C.W.P. No. 3945 of 2014, involving similar subject matter of dispute and common question of law and facts.

(2.) RESPONDENT Indian Oil Corporation is carrying on its business activities throughout the country, including the State of Himachal Pradesh. It published a Notice Annexure P -1, in the issue of English Daily "The Tribune", inviting applications for appointment of LPG Distributors at different locations in the State of Himachal Pradesh, including Paonta Sahib in District Sirmaur. The LPG distributorship for location at Paonta Sahib was reserved for the members of scheduled caste community. According to the petitioner herein, she being member of the schedule caste community was eligible for being considered for the allotment of distributorship. She submitted her application duly supported by the documents, as prescribed in the check list and brochure on guidelines for selection, Annexure P -2. On scrutiny of the applications, Meena Kumari, petitioner herein, was found to be the only eligible candidate for being considered qua the award of distributorship for location at Paonta Sahib. She was informed vide letter dated 10.3.2014, Annexure P -8 that she is the only eligible candidate for the award of distributorship at Paonta Sahib and asked to deposit Rs. 25,000/ -, for the purpose of carrying out the field verification of her credentials, disclosed in the application and the documents annexed therewith. She, in turn, submitted the bank draft in the sum of Rs. 25,000/ -. On verification of her credentials, the requisite amount of Rs. 2.5 lacs was not found to be deposited in her saving bank account in a scheduled bank and rather in H.P. State Cooperative Bank, not a scheduled bank. Also that the FDRs, as disclosed by her in clause 12 of the application, were in the names of minors in Bhoopur Cooperative Multipurpose Society Limited, again not a scheduled bank. Therefore, she was found to have deviated from the eligibility criteria with respect to the funds available with her and as such her candidature was rejected and she was informed about rejection of her candidature vide impugned order Annexure P -10.

(3.) THE grouse of the petitioner in this petition is that the requisite funds of Rs. 2.5 lacs were available in her saving bank account in H.P. State Co -operative Bank, Badripur, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur. She has placed reliance qua this aspect of the matter on the extract of her passbook and also the copies of FDRs, Annexure P -3 (colly). According to her, she is a simpleton villager and did not understand the complexity of every word mentioned in the application form. The meaning of words "scheduled bank", in her wisdom was H.P. State Cooperative Bank, as it is a leading bank in the State of H.P. Above all, in the notice, inviting applications, there is no mention that the required funds should be in saving bank account of the applicant in a scheduled bank. It is, therefore, emphasized that the only requirement is the availability of the funds to the tune of Rs. 2.5 lacs. Whether these funds are in bank "A" or "B", should have not led in rejection of her candidature, that too at such a stage when the selection process for LPG distributorship was over and the condition that such funds should be available in saving bank account of the applicant in a scheduled bank was not clearly pointed out in the notice, inviting applications. It has also been pointed out that at the most availability of the funds in H.P. State Cooperative Bank was merely an irregularity and not illegality; hence rejection of her candidature on flimsy grounds is stated to be illegal.