Raj Kumar v. Union Of India & ORS

Letters Patent Appeal No.1482 of 2015 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Letters Patent Appeal No.1482 of 2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: 12.10.2015.

Raj Kumar ..Appellant versus Union of India and others ..Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL

Present:

Mr. Ashish Naik, Advocate, for Mr. Tara Chand Dhanwal, Advocate, for the appellant.

RAJIVE BHALLA, J.

Civil Misc. Application No.3189-LPA of 2015 Prayer in this application is to condone delay of 230 days in filing the appeal.

Heard.

For reasons stated in the application and arguments addressed, the application is allowed and delay of 230 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

Letters Patent Appeal No.1482 of 2015 The appellant challenges, order dated 16.01.2015 dismissing his writ petition, challenging the award of a retail outlet dealership by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, to respondent no.5.

Counsel for the appellant submits that marks awarded for merits of the candidates have been wrongly tabulated by ignoring KUMAR VIRENDER 2015.10.16 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this docunt High Court Chandigarh

Letters Patent Appeal No.1482 of 2015 (O&M) 2 that a high tension wire passes over the land of respondent no.5 and by awarding higher marks for infrastructure. The appellant has not been awarded any marks for fixed and movable assets despite the fact that he has appended valuation certificate issued by a government valuer. The fact that both the appellant as well as respondent no.5 had taken land on lease from the same land owner, has also been ignored.

We have heard counsel for the appellant, perused the impugned order, appraised averments in the writ petition as well as in the replies filed by the respondents but do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order or grant any relief to the appellant. The appellant is aggrieved against the award of the retail outlet to respondent no.5 and in support of his arguments, refers to marks awarded to both parties. The learned Single Judge, while considering the matter, has examined the contentions in detail and only thereafter passed the order dismissing the writ petition. The marks assigned to the parties by the Technical Valuation Committee, cannot be re-examined, unless they are arbitrary or mala fide. The absence of any such error, does not enable us, to interfere. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.

( RAJIVE BHALLA ) JUDGE ( REKHA MITTAL ) 12.10.2015 JUDGE VK KUMAR VIRENDER 2015.10.16 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this docunt High Court Chandigarh