Siddavaram Madhur Sudan Rao S/O. S.P.Penchalaiah v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Rep. By Its

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO Writ Petition No.12840 of 2011 ORDER:

The petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus declaring the order of 3rd respondent in KNT:LPG: Proddatur dated 18.02.2011, rejecting the petitioner's case for appointment as distributor to the LPG gas agency in Proddatur, Kadapa District pursuant to notification dated 01.10.2007 on immaterial and unsustainable grounds though the petitioner is fully eligible for appointment as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the aforesaid proceedings with a further direction to the respondents to award the Domestic LPG Distributorship at Proddatur, Kadapa District in favour of petitioner.

2) When the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for respondents by producing copy of the order dated 19.10.2006 in W.P.No.20073 of 2009, would submit that in view of pendency of said writ petition and interim order therein which is also relating to LPG distributorship at Proddatur, the respondent authorities could not make any notification for grant of LPG distributorship at Proddatur and in the meanwhile, IOC and HPC have advertised 7 new locations under restructuring of their existing agencies in Proddatur in the year 2013-14. While so, W.P.No.20073 of 2009 was disposed of on 19.10.2006 and during 2016-17 marketing plan was issued under unified guidelines as per which, there was no feasibility for new locations due to market

saturation at Proddatur and therefore no advertisements were given at Proddatur for the year 2016-17. In that view of the matter, learned counsel for respondents would submit, the request of the petitioner to appoint him as distributor to the LPG gas agency in Proddatur, Kadapa District on behalf of respondents does not arise and therefore, the writ petition may be dismissed.

3) Learned counsel for petitioner present and reported no objection. 4) Recording the above submission of both the learned counsel, writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________________ U. DURGA PRASAD RAO, J Date: 17.09.2018 Murthy