Patna High Court
Krishna Kumari Yadav @ Krishna Yadav vs The Union Of India And Ors on 13 May, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16812 of 2015
======================================================
Krishna Kumari Yadav @ Krishna Yadav Wife of Sri Ranvir Yadav Resident
of Shambhawi Sadan, Chukti, P.O. P.S. Mansi, District - Khagaria, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union Of India through the Secretary Ministry of Petroleum and
Natural Gas, Govt. of India, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi
2. The Secretary Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Govt. of India Shastri
Bhawan, New Delhi
3. The Chairman, Indian Oil Corporation Bandra East Mumbai
4. The Regional Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Lok Nayak Jai Prakash
Bhawan, Patna
5. The Dy. General Manager RS Bihar State Office, Indian Oil Corporation
Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Bhaw
6. The Senior Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.,
Begusarai Divisional offic
7. The Sri Divisional Regional Sales Manager, I.O.C. M.D. , Begusarai
8. The Chief Vigilance Officer, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Scope Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : M/s Shekhar Singh, Sr. Advocate
Nikesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Union of India : M/s Dr. K.N.Singh, ASG
Manoj Kumar Singh, CGC
For the IOC : Mr. Ankit Katriar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 13-05-2025
1. The petitioner has filed the instant
application for the following reliefs:
" For issuance of an appropriate writ
preferably in the nature of certiorari
quashing the Letter ref. BSO/RS/RO/659
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
2/19
dated 7.5.2015 (as contained in
Annexure-16) by which the respondents
have justified their earlier action
without appreciating the show cause
submitted on behalf of the petitioner as
they have withdrawn the Letter of
Intent Ref. No. 2013 / IN000745 / BH/
000039 /2304/00005
dated 10.10.2013
issued in favour of the petitioner for
setting of retail outlet 'A' site, on the
proposal location at Purvi Thati in
Khagaria District on totally non- est
ground being influenced by the
candidate who was on the 2nd position
in the interview and further issuance of
writ preferably in the nature of
mandamus directing the respondent
Indian Oil Corporation to do the needful
in terms of the Letter of Intent dated
10.10.2013 and all formalities done
thereafter by the petitioner including
incurring investment more than 25
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
lakhs and further for issuance of writ of
certiorari quashing the re-
advertisement dated 2.10.2013
particularly at Sl. No. 312 as continued
in Annexure-12 and may pass such
other order/orders as your Lordships
may deem fit and proper in the facts
and circumstances of the case.."
2. In nutshell, the contents extracted from
the Writ petition are that the petitioner applied
online pursuant to an advertisement dated
24.09.2011 issued by Indian Oil Corporation
(Marketing Division) for appointment of a Retail
Outlet petrol pump dealership at Purbi Thatha,
within 1 km from Hanuman Mandir (in front of
Hotel Pathik), District Khagaria, under the Open
(W) category. In response, the Corporation issued
an interview letter (Ref. BEGDO/RO/2011-12) dated
22.06.2012, fixing the interview for 12.07.2012.
The petitioner appeared for the interview with all
requisite documents, performed successfully, and
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
was ranked first among the two candidates
interviewed--Ms. Shweta Bharti being the second.
Following the interview, the Corporation issued a
Letter dated 25.09.2012 (Annexure-2) to the
District Magistrate, Khagaria, requesting for a No
Objection Certificate. After completing all
formalities, the Corporation issued a land
inspection Letter dated 17.12.2012 (Annexure-3),
and accordingly inspection was conducted on
19.12.2012. The authorities were satisfied with the
land and its documents. Subsequently, the
Corporation issued a Letter of Intent (LOI) to the
petitioner on 10.10.2013 (Ref. No. 2013 / IN000745
/ BH /000039 /2304/00005; Annexure-4), following
which the petitioner invested around Rs. 25 lakhs
for site development and infrastructure.
3. It is submitted by the petitioner that the
District Magistrate, based on prior communication
and subordinate reports, issued the NOC vide
Letter No. 1842 dated 30.12.2013 (Annexure-5). In
compliance with the Letter of Intent, the petitioner
deposited the licence fee of Rs. 1,00,000/- with
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
NHAI on 21.10.2013 vide Demand Draft No.
730665 through Respondent No. 5, and the
Corporation entered into a land agreement with
the petitioner, fixing monthly rent.
4. It is submitted by the Learned Senior
counsel for the petitioner that there were only two
candidates for interview i.e., the petitioner and
Ms. Shweta Bharti, W/o Shushant Kumar Yadav, R/o
Chukti, P.S. Mansi, Khagaria. Notably, Ms. Bharti's
brother-in-law, Shalil Kumar, and her husband's
uncle, Ajay Kumar Akela, along with other relatives,
operates multiple petrol pumps in the district. It is
further submitted that to oust the petitioner and
gain control of this outlet, they submitted three
objections. The first two objections were
investigated and dismissed as baseless. In the
third objection, it was alleged that the petitioner
was not the owner of Plot No. 150, Khata No. 34,
Mauza Bhaktiyarpur (7.25 katha or 31.6 decimals),
which was claimed to belong to M/s Veer Don Pvt.
Ltd. The petitioner clarified that she purchased the
land through her own income, jointly with her
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
husband, as reflected in the registered sale deed
No. 5794 dated 05.09.2009 (Annexure-7). The land
was paid for vide Bank DD Nos. 488456
(03.09.2009) and 492648 (15.11.2010), both
drawn from the SBI Mansi account of her husband,
Sri Ranbir Yadav. While the petitioner is also the
Managing Director of M/s Veer Don Pvt. Ltd., the
land was purchased in her personal capacity. This
is evident from the sale deed where her profession
is mentioned as "Kasthari"--a term not applicable
to a company. The deed, mutation records, land
receipts, and possession certificate, all stand in her
individual name. Moreover, Register II shows her as
owner under Jamabandi No. 500, and the Revenue
Officer, Mansi, has certified Krishna Yadav W/o
Ranbir Yadav as the landowner.
5. It is submitted by the Learned Senior
counsel for the petitioner that despite submitting
all relevant documents during the inquiry into the
third objection, Respondent No. 6, allegedly acting
with vested interest to benefit the second
candidate, arbitrarily issued the impugned letter
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
(Ref. No. BSO/RO/Purvi Thatha dated 03.05.2014)
withdrawing the Letter of Intent dated 10.10.2013
without affording any opportunity of hearing,
thereby violating principles of natural justice. The
petitioner then represented the matter before the
Minister of Petroleum and Natural Gas,
Government of India, and later before the Chief
Vigilance Officer (Respondent No. 7) on
07.11.2014, expressing concern over the biased
withdrawal of the Letter of Intent. However, no
action has been taken to date. Meanwhile, the
respondent Corporation re-advertised the same
location in the Hindustan newspaper (Sl. No. 312)
on 26.10.2014 for fresh allotment.
6. The Learned Senior counsel for the the
petitioner contends that this re-advertisement is
arbitrary, malafide, and unsustainable in law,
particularly as she is the exclusive legal owner of
the land. Therefore, the impugned order dated
03.05.2014 and the fresh advertisement dated
26.10.2014 should be quashed in the interest of
justice.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
7. It is submitted on behalf of the
petitioner that faced with such situation, the
petitioner preferred a writ petition bearing C.W.J.C.
No. 20692 of 2014 before this Court which was
heard in detail after giving opportunity to the
Indian Oil Corporation and appreciating even their
counter affidavit this Hon'ble Court has disposed
off the writ petition by the following observation :-
"On consideration of the rival
contentions, I find force in the submissions
made on behalf of the petitioner.
In my considered opinion also, if
the authority concerned of the Indian Oil
Corporation found some ambiguity in the
recitals of the sale deed then, before
issuing such Letter with respect to
withdrawal of the letter of intent, it should
have issued notice to the petitioner to
clarify the things and after considering the
reply of the petitioner, it should have taken
a final decision. In the absence of that, the
decision taken by the Corporation vide
Annexure-9 cannot be sustained and,
accordingly, the same is quashed and set
aside.
Let the Indian Oil Corporation
reconsider the grounds of the petitioner
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
which has been raised in the writ
application itself appending a copy of the
sale deed and if after such reconsideration
it comes to the conclusion that, in the facts
and circumstances of the case, there is no
requirement for withdrawal of letter of
intent then they will proceed with the
process of settlement of retail outlet with
the petitioner, however, if they come to
the same conclusion that there is some
ambiguity in the sale deed and there would
be difficulty in proceeding in the facts and
circumstances of the case then they may
issue show cause notice upon the
petitioner and after considering the reply
they would be at liberty to take a decision
in accordance with law specially when
admittedly no third party right has been
created as yet."
8. The Learned Senior counsel for the
petitioner submitted that Respondent No. 5, in
clear defiance of the authoritative direction of this
Hon'ble Court in C.W.J.C. No. 20692 of 2014--
wherein the Court found merit in the petitioner's
submission that the land in question belongs
exclusively to her and not to M/s Veer Don Pvt.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
Ltd., proceeded to issue a show cause notice dated
19.03.2015 (Ref. BSO/RS/RO/659; Annexure-14),
directing the petitioner to respond. In compliance,
the petitioner submitted a detailed reply
(Annexure-15), reiterating that the land was
purchased solely in her name and not in the name
of the company. She enclosed supporting
documents including the registered sale deed,
copies of relevant bank statements showing
payments made from her husband's SBI Mansi
account, and other land ownership records.
Despite this, Respondent No. 5, without properly
appreciating the legal issues or the direction of this
Hon'ble Court, passed the impugned order dated
07.05.2015 (Annexure-16), rejecting the
petitioner's reply and reaffirming the earlier
withdrawal of the LOI dated 03.05.2014. The order
relied on flawed reasoning and documents
allegedly procured from the petitioner in good faith
by field officers of the respondent Corporation. The
petitioner contends that this order is not only
illegal but also amounts to contempt of the Court's
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
order dated 09.02.2015 in C.W.J.C. No. 20692 of
2014.
9. The Learned Senior counsel further
submitted that Respondent No. 5 failed to properly
consider the central legal issue--whether the land
belongs to the petitioner or the company. It is
emphasized that the land was purchased
exclusively in the petitioner's name, which is
supported by the mutation order, where her name
appears as "Smt. Krishna Kumari Yadav, Director of
M/s Veer Don Pvt. Ltd." and not as "M/s Veer Don
Pvt. Ltd. through its M.D.". Additionally, Register-II,
a conclusive government record, names Krishna
Kumari Yadav W/o Sri Ranbir Yadav as the rightful
owner. The land receipt and possession certificate
also reflect her name individually.
10. The Learned Senior counsel further
argued that the reference in the sale deed to her
being Managing Director of the company is merely
descriptive and not indicative of company
ownership. The deed also mentions her profession
as "Kasthkari," lists her personal address (not the
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
registered office of the company), and the land is
not included in the company's assets. This was
further confirmed by the submission of the
company's Memorandum of Understanding and
annual reports (2007-2010) during proceedings in
C.W.J.C. No. 20692 of 2014, which revealed no
company funds were used to purchase the land.
The Hon'ble Court, satisfied with this evidence, had
observed on page 4 of its order dated 09.02.2015:
"On consideration of rival contentions, I find force
in the submissions made on behalf of the
petitioner." It is further submitted that the
respondents based the impugned order primarily
on a document dated 08.10.2012--minutes of a
purported company meeting--allegedly authorizing
the petitioner, as M.D., to lease the land. However,
this document was taken from the petitioner under
false assurances by field officers of the
Corporation, who claimed it would help cure
procedural issues post-LOI. This contradicts the
Corporation's own stated policy that no document
submitted after the application date would be
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
considered. Hence, the reliance on this document
is arbitrary and unlawful, rendering the impugned
order unsustainable in law.
11. The Learned Senior counsel for the
petitioner submitted that the actions and inactions
of the Indian Oil Corporation, culminating in the
impugned order dated 07.05.2015, are not only
illegal, malafide, arbitrary, and in violation of
fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19 of
the Constitution, but also constitute a colourable
exercise of power. Consequently, the fresh
advertisement for the same location (Sl. No. 312)
is also vitiated by bias and illegality. Hence, this
writ petition.
12. A counter affidavit was filed on behalf
of the respondent, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. It
is stated that the subject location--Purbi Thatha,
within 1 KM of Hanuman Mandir (in front of Hotel
Pathik), District Khagaria--was advertised on
24.09.2011 under the Open (W) category for
setting up a Retail Outlet (RO) petrol pump in
Bihar. Two applications were received, and after
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
scrutiny and land evaluation, interviews were held
on 12.07.2012. The following merit panel was
declared: A. Smt. Krishna Kumari Yadav
B. Smt. Kumari Sweta Bharti
13. It is submitted that shortly after the
interview, a complaint was received against the
second candidate, which was duly considered and
disposed of by the competent authority, thereby
leaving the petitioner as the sole empanelled
candidate. After Field Verification of Credentials
(FVC), a Letter of Intent (LOI) was issued to the
petitioner on 10.10.2013 (Annexure-4 to the writ
petition). However, upon further examination, it
was observed that the land offered for the
dealership was partly in the petitioner's name and
partly in the name of M/s Veer Don Pvt. Ltd.,
through its Managing Director, the petitioner
herself. The sale deed showing ownership by the
company is on record as Annexure-7. Moreover, no
notarized affidavit from M/s Veer Don Pvt. Ltd.
transferring ownership or rights in favour of the
petitioner was submitted at the time of application.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
As per applicable IOCL guidelines (Annexure R/1),
since a private limited company has a distinct legal
identity from its Managing Director, the offered
land could not be deemed fully owned by the
petitioner. Accordingly, she was not eligible for full
marks under the parameter "Capability to provide
land and infrastructure." Instead of the 35 marks
earlier awarded, she was entitled to zero marks.
Thus, the Letter of Intent was withdrawn by Letter
dated 03.05.2014 (Annexure-9). Aggrieved, the
petitioner filed CWJC No. 20692 of 2014. The
Hon'ble Court disposed of the matter by order
dated 09.02.2015 (Annexure-13), directing
consideration of the petitioner's case.
14. It is submitted by the Learned counsel
for the respondent Indian Oil Corporation that that
in compliance, a show cause notice dated
19.03.2015 (Annexure-14) was issued to the
petitioner. She submitted her reply (Annexure-15),
received on 30.03.2015. After due consideration,
the Corporation reaffirmed the Letter of Intent
withdrawal through Letter dated 07.05.2015
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
(Annexure-16). The present writ petition challenges
this order.
15. It is submitted by the Learned counsel
for the respondent Indian Oil Corporation that no
further action is pending, and since there is no
other empanelled candidate, the location has been
declared 'Nil selection.' Given the facts and
circumstances, the writ petition lacks merit and is
liable to be dismissed.
16. The petitioner has filed rejoinder to the
counter affidavit in which he reiterated his stand
as mentioned in the writ petition and justified his
stand.
17. Heard the Learned Senior counsel for
the petitioner Mr. Shekhar Singh as well as the
Learned counsel for the respondents.
18. In first round of litigation, this Court
vide order 09.02.2015 passed in CWJC No. 20692
of 2014 was quashed the communication dated
03.05.2014 (Annexure 9) and observed as follows
"In my considered opinion also, if
the authority concerned of the Indian Oil
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
Corporation found some ambiguity in the
recitals of the sale deed then, before
issuing such Letter with respect to
withdrawal of the letter of intent, it should
have issued notice to the petitioner to
clarify the things and after considering the
reply of the petitioner, it should have taken
a final decision. In the absence of that, the
decision taken by the Corporation vide
Annexure-9 cannot be sustained and,
accordingly, the same is quashed and set
aside.
Let the Indian Oil Corporation
reconsider the grounds of the petitioner
which has been raised in the writ
application itself appending a copy of the
sale deed and if after such reconsideration
it comes to the conclusion that, in the facts
and circumstances of the case, there is no
requirement for withdrawal of letter of
intent then they will proceed with the
process of settlement of retail outlet with
the petitioner, however, if they come to the
same conclusion that there is some
ambiguity in the sale deed and there would
be difficulty in proceeding in the facts and
circumstances of the case then they may
issue show cause notice upon the petitioner
and after considering the reply they would
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
be at liberty to take a decision in
accordance with law specially when
admittedly no third party right has been
created as yet."
19. Upon perusal of the sale deed brought
on record as Annexure-7, it is evident from the
recitals therein that the property in question has
been purchased by the petitioner, Smt. Krishna
Kumari Yadav, wife of Sri Ranvir Yadav, whose
occupation is recorded as agriculturist
("Kasthkari") and who is a citizen of India. The
recital in the sale deed clearly indicates that the
purchase was made in the petitioner's personal
capacity.
20. This Court finds that while the
petitioner is described in the sale deed as the
Managing Director of M/s Veer Don Pvt. Ltd., such
reference appears merely to be descriptive of her
designation and is not indicative of the company's
ownership of the said property. The land in
question is not reflected as part of the assets of
M/s Veer Don Pvt. Ltd.. Furthermore, the deed
Patna High Court CWJC No.16812 of 2015 dt.13-05-2025
reflects the personal residential address of the
petitioner and not the registered office of the
company.
21. In view of the above, this Court is of
the considered opinion that the impugned decision
of the respondent Corporation, as contained in
Annexure-16, cannot be sustained in the eyes of
law. Accordingly, the said order is hereby quashed
and set aside.
22. Accordingly, this Writ petition is
allowed.
23. Interlocutory Application(s), if any,
shall stand disposed of.
(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
Spd/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 15.05.2025
Transmission Date
