Ashish Rai Vs Union of India and Others

Allahabad High Court 22 Jan 2013 C.M.W.P. No. 3584 of 2013 (2013) 4 AWC 3519
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

C.M.W.P. No. 3584 of 2013

Hon'ble Bench

Zaki Ullah Khan, J; Satya Poot Mehrotra, J

Advocates

Om Prakash Tripathi, for the Appellant; Ashish Jaiswal, Prakash Padia and A.S.G.I., for the Respondent

Final Decision

Disposed Of

Judgement Text

Translate:

Satya Poot Mehrotra and Zaki Ullah Khan, JJ.@mdashIt appears that an advertisement dated 12.10.2011 was issued by Indian Oil Corporation

Limited for grant of dealership under the Kisan Sewa Kendra Scheme in respect of various locations including the location in question. The

petitioner and others including the respondent No. 4 appeared in interview for grant of dealership in respect of the location in question. The

respondent No. 4 was thereafter selected for grant of dealership in respect of the location in question.

2. Thereupon, the petitioner made a complaint dated 22.8.2012 before the respondent No. 2. Copy of the complaint has been filed as Annexure-4

to the writ petition.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that no action has so far been taken on his complaint by the concerned respondents.

4. We have heard Shri Om Prakash Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Ashish Jaiswal, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 and

Shri P. Padia, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

5. Shri P. Padia, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3, on the basis of instructions received by him, states that the complaint of the

petitioner, which purports to have been made under Clause 18 of the Brochure issued by Indian Oil Corporation Limited, has been received by the

respondent No. 2, and the same is being dealt with by the concerned authority, and the decision thereon will be taken expeditiously.

6. In view of the statement made by Shri P. Padia, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3, on the basis of the instructions received by

him, we are of the opinion that the Interest of justice would be subserved by disposing of the writ petition with the following directions:

1. Within six weeks from today, the petitioner will make an application alongwith a certified copy of this order as well as copy of the complaint

dated 22.8.2012 before the respondent No. 2.

2. On receipt of such application alongwith the documents, mentioned above, the respondent No. 2 or the concerned authority of Indian Oil

Corporation Limited, to whom the papers are forwarded by the respondent No. 2, will take decision on the complaint of the petitioner in

accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of the said application alongwith the documents, after

giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, the respondent No. 4 as well as the other concerned persons and by passing

speaking order.

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

From The Blog
Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India (1984)
Oct
19
2025

Landmark Judgements

Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India (1984)
Read More
I.C. Golak Nath & Ors vs State of Punjab & Anrs (1967)
Oct
19
2025

Landmark Judgements

I.C. Golak Nath & Ors vs State of Punjab & Anrs (1967)
Read More