Dharmavarapu Madhavi, v. The Indian Oild Corporation Ltd.

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO WRIT PETITION No.15074 of 2009 ORDER:

The writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 4 in showing the respondents 5 and 6 as first and second rank in the merit list and selecting the fifth respondent for LPG distributorship of Tirupathi under defence category (woman) as illegal and arbitrary and against the Rules and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3, to issue letter of intent to the petitioner.

The main grievance of the petitioner is that the fifth respondent, who was selected for LPG distributorship of Tirupathi under defence category (woman), filed applications for various areas and subsequently she withdrew the said applications, except Tirupathi, and that she was allotted with the LPG distributorship for Tirupathi, which is illegal as she suppressed the information in the application seeking LPG distributorship for Tirupathi that she has also applied for various areas. Learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 4 as well as the learned counsel for the respondents 5 and 6 submit that as per Rule 19(f) of the Rules for the appointment of LPG Distributorship, any person willing to apply for more than one location, he/she can do so on payment of separate demand draft/pay order as application fee.

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the person, who is applying for more than one location, has to inform the same to the authorities concerned, even though he/she is entitled to apply for various areas for the LPG distributorship, cannot be accepted, as such Rule is not prescribed in the 'Notice for Appointment of LPG Distributors'. Further, it is the case of the fifth respondent that after she has been selected for distributorship for Tirupathi, she has not opted for any of the places other than Tirupathi and that the same is duly informed to the authorities concerned.

In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the view that the action of the respondents 1 to 4 in selecting the fifth respondent as LPG distributorship for Tirupathi, is in accordance with law and this Court is not inclined to interfere with the said action.

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions, if any shall also stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 06.04.2015 pln