Smt. Archana Kumari v. The Indian Oil Corporation And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.8380 of 2014 dt.25-01-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8380 of 2014 ===========================================================

1. Smt. Archana Kumari wife of Sri Manoj Kumar resident of ward No. 12, Suratganj, P.O. and P.S. AND District - Madhubani, presently residing at Flat No. 201, Yashodanand Enclave, Kidwaipuri, P.S. Budha Colony, District - Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Indian Oil Corporation Limited, having its registered office at 9 Ali Yavar Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai through its Managing Director.

2. The General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Limited Bihar State Office at Lok Nayak Bhawan, 5th Floor, Dak Bungalow Road, Patna.

3. The Senior Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Muzaffarpur Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gautam Kumar Kejriwal, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Adv. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 25-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition for a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to operate the dealership of alternate retail outlet already existing at Village- Pokhrauni, Sourath in the District of Madhubani on account of pendency of Letter of Intent (hereinafter referred to as 'LOI') issued by the erstwhile IBP Company Limited to the petitioner.

3. At the very outset, this Court takes note that the LOI was issued to the petitioner as far back as on 06.02.2004 and the petitioner appears to have done little more than file

Patna High Court CWJC No.8380 of 2014 dt.25-01-2016 repeated representations before the respondent Corporation.

4. In the above view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is pursuing a stale claim and finds no merit in the writ petition, which is dismissed. (Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/- U