Dinesh Prasad Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21574 of 2018 ====================================================== Dinesh Prasad Gupta Son of Basant Saw, Resident of Village-Bairiya, PostSahiya, P.S.-Wazirganj, District-Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Gaya.

3.

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms Gaya.

4.

The Circle Officer, Wazirganj Under the District of Gaya. 5.

Indian oil Corporation Limited represented through its Chief Regional Manager, Patna L.P.G. Regional Officer, First Floor, Shahi Bhawan, Exhibition Road, Patna.

6.

The Territory manager, Indian Oil Corporation, First Floor, Shahi Bhawan, Exhibition Road, Patna.

7.

The Deputy general Manager (LPG Sales), Patna Area office, Indian Oil Corporation, First Floor, Shahi Bhawan, Exhibition Road, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjan Kumar Singh, Adv.

Mr. Niranjan Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Subham Singh, Adv.

Mr. Akshay Kr. Adv.

Mr. Vipin Yadav, Adv.

For the Res-IOCL :

Mr. Ankit Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Rishi Sinha, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Dhurjati Kr. Prasad, GP14 For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Subash Chandra Yadav ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 08-09-2025

1. The Writ petition is filed commanding the respondent-Corporation to issue a Letter of Intent in favour of the petitioner for opening the LPG Distributorship (Gramin) at Karjara location, under Gaya District in the OBC category pursuant

2/5 to advertisement dated 17.06.2017, for which he has already performed the formalities and adhered to the guidelines for selection of LPG Distributorships.

2. The brief facts of the writ petition are that the petitioner was an eligible candidate under the OBC category, for issuance of a license for opening a Rural LPG Distributorship, under the advertisement issued by Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred as IOCL) dated 17.06.2017. The petitioner along with other applicants, had submitted his application and was found eligible for the award of the distributorship. One applicant, namely Rupesh Kumar Verma, son of Kali Prasad Verma, also applied and he was initially selected for the Rural LPG Distributorship, and was called for verification with requisite documents. The Corporation found him to be a suitable candidate and selected him. As Rupesh Kumar Verma failed to complete the necessary formalities, his candidature was cancelled. Thereafter, a re-draw of lots was held on 21.07.2018, in which the

3/5 petitioner was selected. Pursuant to this, the petitioner submitted all his documents along with the requisite fee, to the IOCL, but the matter was not finalized by the authorities, for which the petitioner was constrained to file the present Writ petition seeking allotment of the distributorship in his favour.

3. A detailed counter affidavit was filed by the contesting respondent Nos. 5 to 7. The counter affidavit disclose that Rupesh Kumar Verma was initially selected and had offered land for showroom, bearing Khata No. 356, Khesra No. 123, through registered lease document No. 11437 dated 15.07.2017. However, upon field verification, Khata No. 356 and Khesra No. 123 were found to have been erroneously mentioned, instead of Khata No. 300 and Khesra No. 122, for which he submitted a rectification deed No. 9947 dated 11.06.2018. Despite this, IOCL cancelled the candidature of Rupesh Kumar Varma, for which Rupesh Kuumar Verma preferred CWJC No. 14425 of 2018 before this Court, which was disposed of

4/5 on 06.08.2018, directing the Corporation not to reject or cancel his candidature. Being aggrieved by the same, IOCL preferred LPA No. 1270 of 2018, which is still pending before the Court.

4. Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Learned counsel for the respondents.

5. Upon perusal of the entire records, it is evident that the said Rupesh Kumar Verma is not a party to the present Writ petition. Further, the orders of this Court in CWJC No. 14425 of 2018 are binding upon the IOCL, and as such, they are not proceeding further with the allotment of LPG Distributorship to the petitioner. The IOCL has also preferred LPA No. 1270 of 2018 against the order passed in CWJC No. 14425 of 2018, and the same is still pending. In view of the orders of this Court in CWJC NO. 14425 of 2048 dated 06.08.2018, the Corporation cannot proceed with the allotment of LPG distributorship either in favour of the petitioner or in favour of Rupesh Kumar Verma until the disposal of the LPA.

5/5

6. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that no order can be issued against IOCL. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved with the non-allotment of LPG Distributorship, he is always at liberty to implead himself as a party in LPA No. 1270 of 2018, which is pending before the Court.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the Writ petition stands disposed of.

8. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall also be disposed of.

(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J) AMANDEEP/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 16.09.2025 Transmission Date