S.Suriyanarayanan v. The Union Of India

1/6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20-06-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH S.Suriyanarayanan Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Union Of India Rep By Secretary To Government, Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, Govt Of India, Sastri Bhawan, New Delhi 110 001.

2.Indian Oil Corporation Limited Rep. by its Managing Director, G-9, All Yavar Jung Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.

3.Chief General Manager (LPG) Tamilnadu State Office Indian Oil Corporation Ltd, Indian Oil Bhavan, No. 139 Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034.

2/6 4.Divisional LPG Head, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd, Indane Area Office, Marketing Division, 500 Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai 600 018.

Respondent(s) PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records of the 3rd respondent herein in ref No.TNSO/LPG/MOPNG/2024/M13025 dated 26.09.2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein to consider the petitioner by awarding extra marks in LPG - Distributorship in Coimbatore region under open category. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.R.Suryanarayana For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.V.D.Rajendra Prasad for R1 Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali Standing Counsel for R2 to R4

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned communication of the 3rd respondent dated 26.09.2024 and for a consequential direction to the

3/6 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner by awarding extra marks to grant LPG Distributorship to the petitioner in Coimbatore region. 2.Heard Mr.R.Suryanarayana, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr.S.V.D.Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent and Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 2 to 4.

3.The present writ petition is totally misconceived. The petitioner had participated in the year 2004 for LPG Distributorship for Villivakkam, Chennai. Even though, he had obtained sufficient marks in the interview, the distributorship was not granted in his favour. The petitioner was making representations in this regard. The petitioner also filed W.P.No.8595 of 2005 before this Court questioning the decision taken by the Deputy Manager of Indian Oil Corporation, dated 05.01.2005. This writ petition came to be dismissed by this Court by an order dated 15.03.2005 and the petitioner was also given liberty to proceed before the higher authorities. From the year 2005

4/6 onwards, the petitioner seems to be giving representation and ultimately, he has knocked the doors of this Court, when finally the petitioner was intimated that his very claim is unsustainable.

4.The present writ petition is a classic case where the Court is asked to whip a dead horse. A cause of action which arose in the year 2004 and which came to an end in 2005 is now sought to be resurrected after a deep hibernation. The relief as sought for in the present writ petition is unsustainable and this Court does not find any merits in the writ petition. 5.Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No Costs. 20-06-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes ssr

5/6 To 1.Secretary To Government, Union Of India Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, Govt Of India, Sastri Bhawan, New Delhi 110 001.

2.Managing Director, Indian Oil Corporation Limited G-9, All Yavar Jung Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.

3.Chief General Manager (LPG) Tamilnadu State Office Indian Oil Corporation Ltd, Indian Oil Bhavan, No. 139 Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034.

4.Divisional LPG Head, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd, Indane Area Office, Marketing Division, 500 Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai 600 018.

6/6 N.ANAND VENKATESH J.

ssr 20-06-2025