Smt. Ganga Ramdas Edapate v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Through Its Chief Area Manager, Nagpur Area Office,

WP3444-15 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3444/2015 (GANGA RAMDAS EDAPATE VERSUS INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED, NAGPUR) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Deoul Pathak, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rohit Joshi, counsel for the respondent. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ.

DATE : NOVEMBER 24 , 2015.

By this petition, the petitioner challenges the communication of the respondent-Indian Oil Corporation Limited, dated 28.02.2014, rejecting the candidature of the petitioner. The petitioner seeks a further direction to the respondent to issue a letter of intent to the petitioner thereby granting the L.P.G. distributorship, to her.

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the issue involved in this case was also involved in Writ Petition No.2194 of 2014 and this Court has, by an order dated 04.03.2015, allowed the aforesaid writ petition and has directed the respondent to consider the amount of Rs.4,06,065/- lying in the gratuity account of the father of the petitioner therein to be a valid deposit. It is stated that the case of the petitioner is on a better footing as the petitioner has placed the requisite amount in the District Central Co-operative Bank.

Shri Joshi, the learned counsel for the respondentCorporation does not dispute the position of law, as laid down by the order dated 04.03.2015 in Writ Petition No.2194 of 2014 by interpreting Clause 3(9) of the Advertisement. It is admitted that this Court has held that the Banks and the Institutions mentioned in the said clause were not exhaustive and were inclusive in nature.

WP3444-15 In view of the statements made by the learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal of the order dated 04.03.2015 in Writ Petition No.2194 of 2014, it appears that it would be necessary to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 28.02.2014 and direct the respondent-Corporation to consider the candidature of the petitioner for grant of L.P.G. distributorship. Hence, for the reasons recorded in the order dated 04.03.2015 in Writ Petition No.2194 of 2014, the writ petition is partly allowed. The impugned order dated 28.02.2014 is quashed and set aside. The respondent-Corporation is directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for grant of L.P.G. distributorship.

Order accordingly. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE APTE