Nitu Kumari v. The M D Of Indian Oil Corporation And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.770 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9717 of 2014 ====================================================== Nitu Kumari wife of Vinod Kumar, Resident of Village- Ramgarh, P.O Siswan, P.S. Siswan, District- Siwan ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The MD of Indian Oil Corporation, Eastern Region, Marketing Division, Indene Area Office, Patna.
2. The Chief Area Manager, Patna Area Office, Indian Oil Corporation, Limited, First Floor, Shahi Bhawan, Exhibition Road, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey For the Respondent/s :
Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) 22-11-2017 Delay of 5 days is condoned. I. A. No.5708 of 2016 is allowed. Matter is taken up on merits thereafter. Submission of the counsel for the appellant is that since the second land, which was offered by the petitioner, was in the name of the father- in- law and since he was dead, natural corollary will be that it will come by way of inheritance to the husband of the present petitioner and, therefore, the land should have been treated belonging to the family unit. The advertisement is unambiguous. The Indian Oil authority is not here to sit and decide the inheritance part. There should be clear
Patna High Court LPA No.770 of 2016(10) dt.22-11-2017 2/2 documentation with regard to the name and title of the land in question. If any exercise in this regard is taken, it is bound to create unnecessary controversy and arguments on behalf of other eligible candidates. It is also accepted position that the first land, which was offered by the petitioner for consideration, did not fall in the area of the advertised location. That made her ineligible. The second offer did not fit the bills in terms of the advertisement and that is the reason why the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ application, which does not merit any reconsideration.
Appeal has no merit. It is dismissed.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) ( Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) sk U