Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs Union Of India And 2 Ors on 19 November, 2025
Author: Devashis Baruah
Bench: Devashis Baruah
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010226942025
2025:GAU-AS:15726
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6126/2025
SRI SANTOSH BISWAS
S/O- SHRI GOBARDHAN BISWAS, R/O- CHAPLAI PT.-1. PO- BAGDEBA, PS-
DHUPDHARA, GOALPARA-783123, ASSAM
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM
AND NATURAL GAS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW
DELHI 110001
2:THE HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED
A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT PETROLEUM HOUSE-17
JAMSHEDJI TATA ROAD
MUMBAI-400020
MAHARASHTRA.
3:THE HEAD OF GUWAHATI RETAIL REGIONAL OFFICE
HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED
GUWAHATI RETAIL REGIONAL OFFICE
2ND FLOOR
JANAPATH
HD COMPLEX
GS ROAD
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI-781007
ASSA
Page No.# 2/4
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Advocate for the petitioner (s) : Mr. H. K. Das, Advocate
Advocate for the respondent (s) : Ms. A. Gayan, Dy.S.G.I.
Mr. S. Borthakur, Advocate
Date on which judgment is reserved : NA
Date of pronouncement of judgment : 19.11.2025
Whether the pronouncement is of the
Operative part of the judgment? : NA
Whether the full judgment has been
Pronounced? : Yes
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
Heard Mr. H. K. Das, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner. Ms. A. Gayan, the learned counsel
appears on behalf of the respondent No.1 and Mr. S. Borthakur,
the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 &
3.
2. The petitioner herein has assailed the email dated
23.09.2021 as well as the communication dated 03.04.2025
whereby the petitioner's candidature as well as the
representation was rejected respectively.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that at that point of time, on
account of the COVID pandemic and he being physically
handicapped, the petitioner could not obtain the required land to
Page No.# 3/4
come within the ambit of Group 1 or Group 2. However, this
aspect was brought to the notice of the respondents by way of a
representation asking for some more time. However, the same
was rejected vide the communication dated 03.04.2025, and as
such, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. When the matter was taken up by this Court on 31.10.2025,
it was submitted by Mr. H. K. Das, the learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner that in the meantime, the petitioner
has been able to arrive at an understanding with various owners
in respect to the land which can be submitted. This Court also on
that very day enquired with Mr. S. Borthakur, the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 & 3 as to whether
the Respondent Corporation has been able to settle the retail
outlet to any person in the area, which is specifically reserved for
PWD.
5. Mr. S. Borthakur, the learned counsel for the respondent
Nos.2 & 3 submitted on instructions that the respondent Nos.2 &
3 have not been able to grant the settlement in respect to the
advertised location to any PWD candidate.
6. Accordingly, this Court therefore fixed the matter on
14.11.2025 thereby granting liberty to the petitioner to file
additional affidavit. In pursuance thereto, an additional affidavit
Page No.# 4/4
was filed by the petitioner on 15.11.2025 whereby the land
details of a plot of land within the advertised location as well as a
Memorandum of Understanding has been enclosed with the
owners of the land in question wherein it was agreed to that the
owners of the land would lease out a plot of land admeasuring
60 meters in length and 50 meters in breadth, i.e. 3000 sq. m. at
a monthly rent of Rs.20,000/- in the circumstance, the petitioner
is granted the said contract.
7. It is the opinion of this Court that this very aspect ought to
be placed before the respondent Nos.2 & 3 by submitting a
representation rather than the same being brought before this
Court for the first time.
8. Accordingly, this Court therefore disposes of the instant writ
petition thereby granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a
representation to the respondent No.3 along with all such details
for the land in question and it shall be within the jurisdiction of
the respondent Nos.2 & 3 to consider the same taking into
account that till date, they have not been able to find any
suitable PWD candidate for the advertised location.
JUDGE
Pradip Kumar Kalita Digitally signed by Pradip Kumar Kalita
Date: 2025.11.20 11:30:12 +05'30'
Comparing Assistant
