Dinesh Kumar Singh vs Union Of India And 4 Others
2017 Latest Caselaw 2601 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Chief Justice's Court
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31325 of 2017
 

 
Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Singh
 
Respondent :- Union Of India And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandan Sharma,Abhishek Rai
 
Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Prakash Padia
 

 
Hon'ble Dilip B. Bhosale,Chief Justice
 
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.

Heard Mr Abhishek Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr Gyan Narayan Kannaujiya, learned counsel for respondent no.1 and Mr Prakash Padia, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 to 4.

This writ petition challenges the order dated 29.5.2017 issued by respondent no.4, rejecting the petitioner's application for grant of retail outlet dealership on the ground that the lease agreement, produced on record by the petitioner, does not contain a sub-lease clause. The dealership has been awarded in favour of respondent no.5-Neeraj Kumar.

Counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, invited our attention to Annexure-6-Lease Agreement, produced by respondent no.5-Neeraj Kumar, to contend that even his lease agreement does not contain sub-lease clause. Counsel for the respondent-Corporation submits that the lease agreement at Annexure-6, relied upon by the petitioner, is not a genuine document. He placed on record a photocopy of the application submitted by respondent no.5-Neeraj Kumar along with a copy of his lease agreement. The lease agreement, annexed to the application of respondent no.5-Neeraj Kumar dated 17.11.2014, contains sub-lease clause.

From a bare comparison of both the documents, we are satisfied that the photocopy of the lease agreement relied upon by the petitioner is not a genuine document. Counsel for the petitioner could not explain the difference in these two documents even across the Bar. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed.

Order Date :- 20.7.2017

RKK/-

(Dilip B Bhosale, CJ)

(M K Gupta, J)