ANIL KUMAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to cancel the selection of respondent No. 7 (Smt. Veena Rani Singh) as dealer of Indane Liquified Petroleum Gas ('dealership' in short), of the Indian Oil Corporation (respondent No. 2), at Babura, district Bhojpur, and for the further direction to respondent No. 2 to appoint the petitioner in her place.

(2.) The writ petition was originally preferred with the prayer to complete the procedure for award of the dealership in question in accordance with the result published on the notice board of the Dealers Selection Board on 27-3-1999, wherein the petitioner figured at serial No. 1 amongst the list of candidates selected for award of the dealership, and to award the same accordingly to the petitioner. It appears that during the pendency of the present writ petition, the petitioner filed an interlocutory application bearing I.A. No. 919 of 2000, in substance seeking to challenge the selection process on the ground that respondent No. 7 was selected in violation of one of the conditions of the advertisement, namely, that she is not a resident of village Babura, and for the further direction to respondent No. 2 to appoint him in her place because he figured at serial No. 2 of the merit list (Annexure 7). This amendment application was allowed by order dated 14-2-2000, and permission was granted to amend the writ petition. By the same order, Smt. Veena Rani Singh was directed to be impleaded as respondent No. 7. The net result is that the petitioner now assails the selection of respondent No. 7 on the ground that she is not a resident of village Babura, which is one of the conditions of the advertisement. It appears from the records that Babura and Rajapur have been used inter changeably.

(3.) Respondent No. 2 had published an advertisement which had appeared in the local dailies on 2-6-1998 (Annexure 1) inviting applications, inter alia, for the dealership for village Babura, district Bhojpur, one of the conditions of which was that vide paragraph 2 (gha) of the advertisement 2-6-1998 was the last date for submission of application, which was extended on two occasions and ultimately 28-8-1998 was declared to be the last date for submission of applications. The petitioner, respondent No. 7, and others submitted their applications. The final merit list of three persons was published on 27-3-1999 (Annexure 7), wherein respondent No. 7 figures at serial No. 1, and the petitioner figures at serial No. 2. The petitioner submitted representation dated 17-4-1999 (Annexure 6), alleging therein that respondent No. 7 is not a resident of Babura, paragraphs 4, 5 and 8 of which are set out hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference :