Smt. Anju Vishnoi vs Indian Oil Corporation
2021 Latest Caselaw 17484 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 531/2021

Smt. Anju Vishnoi W/o Shri Radhakishan, Aged About 31 Years, R/o 1/24, Adarsh Nagar, Phalodi, Distt. Jodhpur.

----Appellant Versus

1. Indian Oil Corporation, Through General Manager, Rajasthan State Office, Ashok Chowk, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur 302004.

2. Deputy General Manager (Retail Sales), Marketing Division, Jodhpur Divisional Office, Sector-12, Chopasni Housing Board, Jodhpur 342008.

3. Sanjay Kumar Vishnoi S/o Shri Sultana Ram, R/o Village Kanasar, Tehsil Bap, Distt. Jodhpur.

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Kumar Shah. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Shah, AAG.

Mr. Hapu Ram.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

23/11/2021

This appeal is filed by the original petitioner to challenge the

judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 12.08.2021. The

petitioner as well as the original respondent no. 3 were applicants

for allotment of retail outlet of petrol pump. The respondent no. 1

and 2 namely Indian Oil Corporation and Deputy General Manager

accepted the candidature for the petitioner as well as respondent

no. 3. On lottery being drawn, respondent no. 3 got lucky and the

dealership was awarded in favour of respondent no. 3. The

petitioner challenges the decision on the ground that the

(2 of 2) [SAW-531/2021]

respondent no. 3 has not provided adequate land for setting up

the petrol pump as per the norms set out by the Oil Company.

Before the learned Single Judge, the Oil Company pointed

out that as per their procedure, verification is done once the

decision to award the dealership in favour of a particular person is

arrived at. Accordingly, the land offered by the respondent no. 3

was verified and found to be perfectly within the rules and

regulations of the Oil Company.

In that view of the matter, the learned Single Judge in our

view has committed no error in dismissing the petition. The

submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner

regarding the location of the land and some similar overlapping

land also having been offered by another candidate, are in the

realm of disputed questions of fact and cannot be entertained in a

writ petition or appeal.

The appeal is dismissed accordingly.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J (AKIL KURESHI),CJ

76-jayesh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)