Arpana Kumari @ Arpana Singh v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1846 of 2016 ====================================================== Arpana Kumari @ Arpana Singh ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The Union Of India and Ors ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG-13 For the IOCl : Mr. Sanat Kumar Mishra, Adv.

For Pvt. Respondent : Mr. Vaidehi Raman Pd. Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY ORAL ORDER 08-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. This Court has passed a detailed order dated 21.08.2023, which reads as under;

" Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in spite of best effort, he could not contact his client for getting necessary instructions.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has stated that the matter has already become infructuous as the dealership of Kishan Seva Kendra has already been allotted on 28th September, 2015 in the name of Kiran Bala Kumari. And the petitioner has not taken any steps to challenge the letter of intent granted in favour of the third party.

3. As a mater of last indulgence, time is granted till 08.09.2023 to enable the counsel for the petitioner to get necessary instructions, failing which the matter will be decided on merit.

4. Post this matter on 08.09.2023."

Patna High Court CWJC No.1846 of 2016(7) dt.08-05-2024 2/2

3. Admittedly, respondent- IOCL has allotted the dealership of Kishan Seva Kendra in favour of Kiran Bala Kumari on 28.09.2015 which has not been challenged by the petitioner.

4. It is reported by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has no instruction as to whether third party interest has been created or not and he contends that if it be so, the petitioner may be directed to file a representation to the respondent- IOCL and if it is feasible to the IOCL to accommodate the petitioner, he can be accommodated even in the future allotments of dealership.

5. In such view of the matter, the petitioner shall make a representation to the respondent- IOCL and if at all it is feasible, the IOCL shall consider the representation of the petitioner on merits, if any future vacancy of dealership arises.

6. With the aforesaid observation, this writ application stands disposed of.

(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J) brajesh/- U