Vishwajeet Kumar v. The Union Of India And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1833 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17870 of 2013 ====================================================== Vishwajeet Kumar, Son of Shardanand Yadav, Resident of Mohalla- Aziz Ghatm, P.O.+P.S. Biharsharif, District- Nalanda. ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. The Chairman and Managing Director, Indian Oil Corporation, G-9, Ali Yavar Jung Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai- 400059.
3. The General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation, Bihar State Office, Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Bhawan, (5th Floor), Dak Bunglow Chowk, Patna- 800001.
4. The Dy. General Manager (LPG), Indian Oil Corporation, Bihar State Office, Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Bhawan, (5th Floor), Dak Bunglow Chowk, Patna - 800001.
5. The Chief Area Manager, Patna Area Office Indian Oil Corporation, Shahi Bhawan (1st Floor), Exhibition Road, Patna- 800001.
6. Ms. Sudipta Sinha, D/O Sri Harish Chandra Prasad, Resident of Flat No. 3, SFBI/44, B.H. Colony, Bhoot Nath Road, Kankarbagh, P.S.- Agamkuya, District- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Dayan Shanker Prasad For the Respondent/s :
Mr. S.D SANJAY (ADDL. SOC. GEN.) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) 04-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, counsel for the Indian Oil Corporation as well as the private-respondent. Since the Letter of Intent of the present appellant stood canceled and that order of cancellation was upheld not only by a Learned Single Judge but even in appeal and even a Review Application, preferred against the order, stood dismissed, the
Patna High Court LPA No.1833 of 2016(6) dt.04-01-2018 2/2 entire exercise now is futile, as no amount of effort made on behalf of the present appellant can beget him the dealership of LPG in question.
So far as the assignment of dealership to the privaterespondent is concerned, that has been taken note of by the Learned Single Judge in his order, dated 20th of July, 2016, and the said dealership is functional now.
The appeal, in that view of the matter, remains academic. It is dismissed, accordingly.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) ( Nilu Agrawal, J) skm/- U