M.Katju, J. - (1.) This writ petition has been filed for a writ of certiorari calling for the entire record in respect of allotment of retail outlet situated at Waheed Nagar, district Sant Ravidas Nagar and for quashing the entire selection process.
(2.) The petitioner has also prayed for a mandamus directing the respondent not to interfere in the running of the retail outlet situated at Waheed Nagar, district Sant Ravidas Nagar by the petitioner. The petitioner further prayed that the respondents be directed not to issue any letter of intent in favour of respondent No. 4 or any of the other empanelled candidates.
(3.) It is alleged by the petitioner that the Government, of India had taken a policy decision by which it allowed parallel marketing In petroleum and its products and the market was opened up for private entrepreneurs, and thus the monopoly which was being exercised by the four oil companies, namely. Indian Oil Corporation, Bharat Petroleum, I.B.P. and Hindustan Petroleum, was ended. After opening up of the petroleum market in the country, there was stiff competition with the aforesaid four Government owned oil companies. It is alleged in para 4 of the writ petition that with a view to steal a march over the private entrepreneurs, the aforesaid four Government owned oil companies embarked upon a dubious but novel method of capturing the best commercial sites for installation of the retail outlets. In its exercise, the officials of the Indian Oil Corporation were scouting for an appropriate land for setting up a retail outlet at the main crossing at Waheed Nagar in district Sant Ravidas Nagar on the main G.T. Road running between Allahabad to Varanasi. The most suitable commercial sites at the aforesaid crossing belonged to the father-in-law of the petitioner with his brothers. The officials of the Corporation approached the father-in-law of the petitioner, namely. Prakash Nath Misra and tried to lure him into selling a portion of his land situated at Waheed Nagar crossing to the Corporation and in the alternative, to lease it out for a period of 30 years. The father-in-law of the petitioner refused to do so since the price offered was miserably low and also the monthly lease rent was only about Rs. 8,000. The petitioner, a gullible villager could barely make his two ends meet and had to support a large family including three daughters. The petitioner cannot read or understand the English language. It is alleged that the officials of the Corporation promised to lease out the retail outlet in exchange for the aforesaid land and induced the petitioner to some how talk to his father-in-law into leasing out an area of 1401.50 square meters of the land to the Corporation. The father-in-law of the petitioner knew the plight of the petitioner very well and thus to enable the petitioner to make a decent living, agreed to lease out the aforesaid portion of the land to the Corporation even though the terms were highly unfair and arbitrary. A lease deed was executed on 25.8.2000, by Prakash Nath and his three brothers in favour of the Corporation on the promise and inducement that the retail outlet to be set up at the site would be leased out to the petitioner. The lease deed was drawn in the English language and executed on the aforesaid date, i.e., 25.8.2000 and a copy of the same was promised to be supplied to the petitioner but in vain. The petitioner invested his life's savings in development of the leased plot and worked extremely hard for obtaining necessary permission of the concerned authorities and the retail outlet came up on the aforesaid site. The officials of the Corporation granted a work order on 29.12.2000, to the petitioner for a period of one year only. A true copy of work order dated 29.12.2000 is Annexure-1. The petitioner was made to sign several documents which were in English. However, the copies of the same were never supplied to him. In para 19 of the petition, it is alleged that to run the aforesaid outlet, the petitioner obtained loan from different sources including from State Bank of India. Gyanpur branch in nature of cash credit facility to the tune of Rs. 8,00,000 in order to effectively run the aforesaid retail outlet, A certificate to the aforesaid effect is Annexure-2. In the month of September, 2000, the petitioner came to know that an advertisement had been issued in the daily news paper Dainik Jagran published on 25.8,2000, where applications were invited for allotment of several outlets situated at different sites which were being run by or on behalf of the Corporation. The petitioner met the then Senior Divisional Manager of the Corporation at Allahabad and protested, but he Informed the petitioner that this was a formality and pointed to him that the advertisement had clearly stated that preference would be given to those persons who are either willing to transfer the land or lease it out. It is alleged in para 21 that the then Senior Divisional Manager also informed the petitioner that since the petitioner has already allowed the Corporation to obtain the land on lease, he would be given preference, and further preference would be given to the petitioner since he is already running a retail outlet and no complaints were found. A true copy of advertisement dated 25.8.2000 is Annexure-3.;