Muniyandi A v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR Writ Petition(MD)No.7621 of 2024 and W.M.P(MD)No.6976 & 6972 of 2024 Dr.A.Muniyandi .. Petitioner Vs 1.Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., rep. by its Executive Director, Indian Oil Bhavan, 139, Nungampakkam High Road, Chennai - 34.

2.The Deputy General Manager, Coimbatore Division, Indian Oil Corporation, Avinashi Road, Coimbatore - 641 018.

3.The Divisional Manager, Coimbatore Division, Indian Oil Corporation, Avinashi Road, Coimbatore - 641 018.

4.The Sales Officer, Coimbatore Division, Indian Oil Corporation, Avinashi Road, Coimbatore - 641 018.

..Respondents 1/6

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned Order dated 11.03.2024 in Ref.IOC16972794607234 on the file of Respondent No. 3 and quash the same as illegal and consequently for a direction to the Respondent Nos.3 and 4 herein to consider the Application of the Petitioner for Retail Outlet dealership at NH - 383 Natham Byepass Over bridge Intersection ( Dindigul - Natham - Kottampatty Road ) ( SC Category ) dated 14.10.2023 under Group-2 category within the time period stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Rajasekar For Respondents : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff Standing Counsel

ORDER

The petitioner challenges the communication dated 11.03.2024 issued by the third respondent, whereby the petitioner's candidature for the award of a retail petroleum outlet dealership came to be rejected.

2.The Indian Oil Corporation Limited issued a notification inviting applications from eligible candidates for the appointment of regular and rural retail outlet dealerships. Claiming eligibility, the petitioner submitted an application on 14.10.2023 under Group-2 for allotment of a retail petroleum outlet dealership by offering land comprised in Survey Nos.625/6, 625/7, 625/9, 625/12 and 625/13 situated at Punnapatti Village, Natham Taluk, Dindigul District. 2/6

3.The application submitted by the petitioner was processed by the respondent Corporation. During field verification, it was found that the lessor, through whom the petitioner claimed rights over the land, had acquired title in respect of two of the survey numbers only on 30.10.2023. Consequently, the petitioner's candidature was rejected on the ground that, as on the date of submission of the application, neither the petitioner nor his lessor had valid rights over the said two survey numbers, thereby rendering the petitioner ineligible under the applicable Guidelines.

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 5.The respondent Corporation has framed the Guidelines for Selection of Dealers for Regular and Rural Retail Outlets through the draw of lots/bidding process. Clause 4(vi) under Group-2 prescribes the land eligibility criteria applicable to all categories of applicants. As per the said clause, an applicant must have a firm offer of a suitable piece of land either by way of ownership, purchase, or long-term lease for a minimum period of 19 years and 11 months, or such period as may be prescribed by the Oil Marketing Company (OMC). The Guidelines further stipulate that the land must be available with the 3/6

applicant as on the date of submission of the application and must be covered by a valid lease satisfying the prescribed minimum tenure. 6.In the present case, it is not in dispute that the petitioner had a valid lease in respect of three of the survey numbers on the date of submission of the application. However, in respect of the remaining two survey numbers, the lessor acquired title only on 30.10.2023, which was subsequent to the date of submission of the application, namely, 14.10.2023. Therefore, as on the date of the application, the petitioner did not possess a valid and enforceable right over the entire extent of land offered in support of his candidature. 7.The eligibility criteria prescribed under the Guidelines are mandatory in nature and are required to be satisfied as on the date of submission of the application.

Since the petitioner failed to satisfy the land eligibility requirements prescribed under Clause 4(vi) of the Guidelines, the respondent Corporation was justified in holding that the petitioner was not eligible for consideration under Group-2. 8.In such circumstances, the impugned communication dated 11.03.2024 issued by the third respondent cannot be said to suffer from any arbitrariness, illegality, procedural irregularity, or infirmity warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

9.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation further submitted that several other eligible candidates are awaiting consideration for allotment of the retail outlet dealership under Group-2. Therefore, any indulgence shown to the petitioner despite his ineligibility would adversely affect the rights of other eligible applicants and defeat the very purpose of the selection process. 10.In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner failed to satisfy the eligibility criteria prescribed under the applicable Guidelines and, therefore, is not entitled to the grant of a retail petroleum outlet dealership under Group-2.

11.Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

03.06.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes skn 5/6

HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.

skn Writ Petition(MD)No.7621 of 2024 and W.M.P(MD)No.6976 & 6972 of 2024 03.06.2026 6/6