V.Adithya v. The Divisional Retail Sales Head
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.02.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN V.Adithya ...
Petitioner Vs 1 The Divisional Retail Sales Head Indian Oil Corporation Limited Chennai Divisional Office, 500, Anna Salai, Teynampet Chennai - 600 018.
2 Sankari ...
Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the interview for the selection of service provider in the Company owned company operated outlet at Marai Malai Nagar, Chengalpet District, conducted on 11.11.2022 which culminated in publication of the Mark Sheet (Provisional) for service provider in COCO in Maraimalai Nagar, Chengalpattu District, dated 11.11.2022 published in the notice Board of the 1st respondent,quash the same insofar as the 2nd respondent is concerned and direct the 1st respondent to select the petitioner as the service provider. For the Petitioner :
Mr.R.N.Amarnath For the Respondents :
Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali, Standing Counsel, for the first respondent 1/4
O R D E R
It appears that the petitioner had given a petition before the grievance cell and the petitioner had also been intimated to produce certain documents. Parallely filing the writ petition cannot be appreciated. But let me not jump to any conclusion and pass orders.
2. The documents relating to giving that particular complaint before the grievance cell and the communication from the grievance cell have also been enclosed along with the typed set of papers.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that all facts have been disclosed but since the issue relating to the grant license or otherwise to the petitioner is still pending before the competent authority, it would only be appropriate that the said authority examines the same in accordance with the rules and regulations of the first respondent and disposes of the same.
4. I am not entering into any discussion on the merits of the case but I would rather that the petitioner await the opinion of the grievance cell and also give him necessary liberty to take up the 2/4
matter again even by filing a writ petition questioning the order of the grievance cell if a writ petition is maintainable on that scope.
5. Let me not keep the writ petition pending but give that liberty to the writ petitioner.
6. Writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, WMP Nos.5069 and 5070 are closed.
22.02.2023 Index: Yes/no mrn To 1 The Divisional Retail Sales Head Indian Oil Corporation Limited Chennai Divisional Office, 500, Anna Salai, Teynampet Chennai - 600 018.
3/4
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
(mrn) 22.02.2023 4/4