PRANATI PRIYADARSHINI DASH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed with a prayer to declare the selection of LPG distributorship for Chhatia in the district of Jajpur under the Rajib Gandhi Gramin LPG Vitrak (in short, 'RGGLV Yojana) in favour of opposite party No.4 - Shri Asit Kumar Sahu as illegal and to quash of the letter dated 14.10.2010 (Annexure -F/2) by which opposite party no.4 was offered RGGLV distributorship at Chhatia on certain conditions mentioned therein. The further prayer of the petitioner is to direct opposite party no.2 -Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (in short, 'BPCL) to make second draw/lottery for selection of LPG distribution for Chhatia under RGGLV Distributor Scheme.

(2.) PETITIONERS case in a nutshell is that on 20.10.2009 an advertisement was published in daily Odia Newspaper 'The Sambad by three Oil Companies, namely, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. for selection of RGGLV Distributors in different places within the State. The petitioner applied for distributorship of LPG under BPCL for Chhatia in the district of Jajpur. After scrutiny of the application forms, on 10.4.2010 in website opposite party no.2 has published the names of eligible candidates, who have qualified for selection of RGGLV for Chhatia. In that list, petitioners name finds place at Sl. No.2. The said list further discloses that the petitioner has secured 96.5 marks as per the marking procedure for selection. As per the condition stipulated in clause -8 of the advertisement, the selection of candidates for LPG distributor was to be made by lottery among the eligible candidates. Accordingly, vide letter dated 27.4.2010 the petitioner was called for by opposite party no.2 to attend the draw of selection on 18.5.2010 which was scheduled to be held in the Conference Hall of Bharat Petroleum Corporation, Bhubaneswar. Pursuant to the said letter, the petitioner attended the draw on 18.5.2010 and in the said draw opposite party no.4 -Asit Kumar Sahu was selected as LPG distributor for Chhatia. Thereafter, petitioner received a letter dated 19.7.2010 from opposite party no.2 inter alia stating that the draw of LPG distributorship for Chhatia will be held on 12.8.2010 in the Conference Hall of BPCL again. Petitioners case is that after receiving the said letter, she thought that the previous selection was cancelled. All of a sudden, the petitioner received another letter dated 5.8.2010 from opp. Party no.2 wherein it was stated that the draw scheduled to be held for selection of LPG distributorship for Chhatia on 12.8.2010 has been cancelled. The petitioners case is that she learnt from reliable sources that the authorities are going to allot the distributorship of LPG for Chhatia in favour of opposite party no.4 again without making any draw, though he has been disqualified earlier. Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) MR . S.D. Das, learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing on behalf of opposite party No.1 submits that as per the modification/ clarification dated 15.6.2010, Clause -8 thereof provides that if the applicant has another plot of land in his name as per 'family unit norms with date of registration on or before the date of the application, the same would be taken into consideration as "alternate land". Sri Asit Kumar Sahu was originally selected and during field verification, it was found that the land offered in his application form was not within the advertised location and opportunity was given to him in terms of Clause -8 of the modified guidelines (Annexure -C/2) to provide another plot of land standing in his name as per 'family unit norms with date of registration on or before the date of application. Therefore, there has been absolutely no illegality on the part of the Corporation in providing an opportunity to Sri Asit Kumar Sahu to provide an alternate land.