SAVITA DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MATERIAL facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the petitioner was allotted gas agency at Nagrota Surian. The distributorship agreement was entered between the petitioner and respondent No.3 on 30.8.1999. Petitioner made several representations to respondent No.3 either to increase the number of gas connections or to re -locate/re -site the gas agency. The representations made by the petitioner were duly considered and respondent No.3 decided to re -locate the petitioners gas agency at Baddi in the year 2007.

(2.) MR . Dushyant Dadwal has strenuously argued that once respondent No.3 has decided to relocate/re -site the petitioner -company at Baddi, it was not open to respondent No.2 to issue advertisement whereby applications were invited from open category for the allotment of gas agency at Baddi. He then contended that the decision of respondent No.2 -compnay to open gas agency at Baddi was not permissible as per the professed norms. He lastly contended that new gas agency of respondent No.2 could not be permitted to come up within the radius of 15 kilometers.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the pleadings carefully.