SANJAY KUMAR SHUKLA Vs. M/S BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.
LAWS(SC)-2014-2-9
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PATNA)
Decided on
February 07,2014
SANJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
Appellant
VERSUS
M/S Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
RAMANA DAYARAM SHETTY VS. INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]FERTILIZER CORPORATION KAMGAR UNION REGD SINDRI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE CHANDAN NAGAR WEST BENGAL VS. DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
TATA CELLULAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAMNIKLAL N BHUTTA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
RAUNAQ INTERNATIONAL LIMITED VS. I V R CONSTRUCTION LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
AIR INDIA LIMITED VS. COCHIN INT AIRPORT LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
MASTER MARINE SERVICES PVT LTD VS. MALFE and HODGKINSON PVT LTD [REFERRED TO]
TEJAS CONSTRUCTIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD VS. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL SENDHWA [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
THREE STAR POULTRY FARM VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2014-4-30] [REFERRED TO]FAROOQ HUSSAIN VS. STATE OF J&K AND ORS. [LAWS(J&K)-2017-8-48] [REFERRED TO]
R.K.CHAVAN INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2020-10-319] [REFERRED TO]
M/S.MAHENDRA REALTORS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD. VS. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER AND ANR. [LAWS(BOM)-2016-12-29] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. S.N. BOSE & CO. VS. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER [LAWS(CAL)-2016-4-205] [REFERRED TO]
NAYEEM AKHTAR KHAN VS. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD AND ORS [LAWS(CAL)-2016-3-234] [REFERRED TO]
VEDPRAKSH POWER PRIVATE LIMITED VS. POWER COMPANY OF KARNATAKA LIMITED [LAWS(KAR)-2016-12-13] [REFERRED TO]
T GANGKAK ENTERPRISES, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIET VS. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SE [LAWS(GAU)-2018-5-65] [REFERRED TO]
SMT. DEVIKA SHUKLA VS. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2016-8-58] [REFERRED TO]
PRAGATI AGRIBIZ LLP VS. MANAGING DIRECTOR [LAWS(MPH)-2021-4-12] [REFERRED TO]
TRANSVISION SOFTWARE & DATA SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. AND ORS. VS. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. [LAWS(KAR)-2015-8-68] [REFERRED TO]
AKHILESHWAR KUMAR PATHAK VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2015-8-134] [REFERRED]
SHYAMA SELF HELP GROUP VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2024-2-23] [REFERRED TO]
RASHBEHARI SAHA VS. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED [LAWS(CAL)-2022-5-17] [REFERRED TO]
MEENA KUMARI VS. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION [LAWS(HPH)-2014-11-109] [REFERRED TO]
MANJIBHAI ANADABHAI KANOL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-2019-7-106] [REFERRED TO]
ASHA LOHIA VS. THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(PAT)-2015-8-73] [REFERRED TO]
RAMKY INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. [LAWS(PAT)-2015-10-25] [REFERRED TO]
VIVEK SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2017-9-93] [REFERRED TO]
PRAFULLA KUMAR PRADHAN VS. STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS [LAWS(ORI)-2016-11-1] [REFERRED TO]
SK. AFTAB AHAMMAD VS. STATE OF ODISHA [LAWS(ORI)-2014-8-41] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL BISHNOI VS. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-10-22] [REFERRED TO]
G.S. & COMPANY VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2016-1-35] [REFERRED TO]
RAM CHANDER PATHANIA VS. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD AND OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2016-10-155] [REFERRED TO]
SUMAN BALA VS. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED [LAWS(HPH)-2019-9-57] [REFERRED TO]
NIDHI SEED CORPORATION VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS [LAWS(UTN)-2017-12-56] [REFERRED TO]
ABHIJEET KUMAR PANDEY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2023-3-21] [REFERRED TO]
VIJETA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2018-1-249] [REFERRED TO]
BALVIKASH SEWA SANSTHAN VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2018-5-115] [REFERRED TO]
V.KRISHNAN VS. THE SECRETARY UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM & NATURAL GAS, [LAWS(MAD)-2016-8-65] [REFERRED TO]
SUBHASH CHANDRA UPADHYAY VS. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD [LAWS(ALL)-2016-7-304] [REFERRED]
NAYEEM AKHTAR KHAN VS. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD & ORS [LAWS(CAL)-2017-6-118] [REFERRED TO]
S.N. BOSE & CO. VS. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED AND ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2016-4-42] [REFERRED TO]
POONAM CONCRETE VS. UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD. AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2014-10-172] [REFERRED]
APPU FOOD PRODUCTS VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2019-2-515] [REFERRED TO]
A2Z INFRA SERVICES LTD. VS. NAGPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [LAWS(BOM)-2019-9-43] [REFERRED TO]
NISHY CHARAK VS. STATE AND ORS [LAWS(J&K)-2018-3-42] [REFERRED TO]
YOJAKA INIDA PRIVATE LIMITED VS. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA [LAWS(KAR)-2022-7-1475] [REFERRED TO]
SAYED AFRIDI SARKAR VS. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED [LAWS(CAL)-2023-10-52] [REFERRED TO]
RITA KUMARI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(PAT)-2016-7-195] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD SULTAN KHAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MPH)-2021-7-39] [REFERRED TO]
KRISNAA DIAGNOSTICS PVT. LTD. VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2021-2-22] [REFERRED TO]
K.D.GEORGE VS. GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(KER)-2017-3-404] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR MEENA VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2016-1-24] [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED VS. ATUL NAYAK [LAWS(MPH)-2014-8-125] [REFERRED TO]
D. PUKEHO MAO VS. THE STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(MANIP)-2016-11-5] [REFERRED TO]
MEGA ELECTRICALS VS. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS [LAWS(GAU)-2016-10-40] [REFERRED TO]
ACER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2016-9-4] [REFERRED TO]
SANJEET KUMAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(PAT)-2015-8-1] [REFERRED TO]
M/S VAJRA CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED VS. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(PAT)-2015-11-98] [REFERRED]
ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED VS. HIMACHAL PRADESH ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER [LAWS(HPH)-2017-8-89] [REFERRED TO]
GEO CONSULTANCY SERVICES VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2019-7-15] [REFERRED TO]
SAHELI PATRA VS. BHARAT PETROLIEUM CORPORATION LTD [LAWS(CAL)-2014-6-57] [REFERRED TO]
ABHIJEET KUMAR PANDEY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2023-2-19] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)These appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 16.05.2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Letters Patent Appeal Nos.1845 and 1916 of 2011. By the aforesaid impugned order, the High Court has directed that the respondent No.7 herein who was placed at serial No.2 of the select list/merit panel for award of dealership of retail outlet under the respondent No.1, i.e. M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., be offered the said dealership after completing the process contemplated under the selection procedure in force in the Corporation.
(3.)A summary of the essential facts is delineated hereinbelow:-
The first respondent Corporation issued an advertisement dated 30.05.2010 for award of dealership of retail outlets in different locations including Areraj, East Champaran District in the State of Bihar. The selection was to be made in accordance with the norms laid down by the Corporation and available in a booklet published on 15.09.2008 under the caption "procedure for selection of petrol/diesel retail outlet dealers" (hereinafter referred to as the "Norms"). On the basis of the applications received for grant of the dealership in question, a selection was held wherein the appellant was placed at Sl.No.1 with 78.04 marks whereas the respondent No.7 who had secured 77.75 marks was placed at Sl.No.2. The dealership was to be offered to the most meritorious candidate after necessary field verification. The norms contemplated issuance of a Letter of Intent (LoI) on the expiry of 30 days from the date of publication of the select list/merit panel or till disposal of complaints, if any, with regard to the selection made by the Corporation. A grievance redressal mechanism is expressly laid down in the 'Norms'.
(2.)These appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 16.05.2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Letters Patent Appeal Nos.1845 and 1916 of 2011. By the aforesaid impugned order, the High Court has directed that the respondent No.7 herein who was placed at serial No.2 of the select list/merit panel for award of dealership of retail outlet under the respondent No.1, i.e. M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., be offered the said dealership after completing the process contemplated under the selection procedure in force in the Corporation.
(3.)A summary of the essential facts is delineated hereinbelow:-
The first respondent Corporation issued an advertisement dated 30.05.2010 for award of dealership of retail outlets in different locations including Areraj, East Champaran District in the State of Bihar. The selection was to be made in accordance with the norms laid down by the Corporation and available in a booklet published on 15.09.2008 under the caption "procedure for selection of petrol/diesel retail outlet dealers" (hereinafter referred to as the "Norms"). On the basis of the applications received for grant of the dealership in question, a selection was held wherein the appellant was placed at Sl.No.1 with 78.04 marks whereas the respondent No.7 who had secured 77.75 marks was placed at Sl.No.2. The dealership was to be offered to the most meritorious candidate after necessary field verification. The norms contemplated issuance of a Letter of Intent (LoI) on the expiry of 30 days from the date of publication of the select list/merit panel or till disposal of complaints, if any, with regard to the selection made by the Corporation. A grievance redressal mechanism is expressly laid down in the 'Norms'.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.