- (1.) B. S. Chauhan, J. The proceedings of the Dealer Selection Committee of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. , (hereinafter referred to as the "corporation") taken in the meeting held on 4- 11 -2003 have been challenged in the present petition and a further direction has been sought that the Letter of Intent may not be issued In favour of private respondent No. 5, i. e. Shri Keshav Nath Shukla (hereinafter referred to as "shri Shukla") pursuant to the aforesaid selection. Other conse quential reliefs have also been sought.
(2.) AN advertisement was issued by the Corporation on 14-9-2000, for allot ment of dealership of High Speed Diesel and Petrol. A perusal of the ad vertisement and the eligibility criteria as published by the Corporation shows that the applicant should have been a resident of the concerned District. For the said purpose, the applicants were required to produce separately a Residence Certificate Issued within pre vious six months of the date of applica tion duly signed by the Competent Government Authority as per the format attached. This was contained in Appen dix D. In the eligibility criteria it has also been mentioned that if any statement made in the application or in the docu ments enclosed therein or sub sequently submitted in pursuance of the application by the candidate at any stage is found to be incorrect or false, the application would be rejected without assigning any reason. The note contained to the ap plication form required to be filled up by every candidate reads as under: "the terms ordinarily resides used here will have the same meaning as in Section 20 of the Representation of people Act, 1950". On the basis of the applications submitted by various persons, interview letters were issued by the Corporation for appearing before the Dealer Selec tion Committee on 4-11-2003. The petitioner and the respondent Nos. 5 and others appeared before the Dealer Selection Committee and thereafter a panel was prepared by the aforesaid selection committee in which Shri Shukla was placed at Serial No. 1, while Gayatri Devi and Lavkesh Kumar were placed at Serial Nos. 2 and 3 respec tively.
(3.) THE dispute in the present peti tion relates to Shri Shukla who had been placed at Serial No. 1, as accord ing to the petitioner he was not a resi dent of Village Chak Parauna, though the resident certificate submitted by him did mention that he was a resident of Village Chak Parauna District Sant Ravidas Nagar. It has been stated that a complaint was made in respect of the aforesaid certificate of Shri Shukla and thereafter on an enquiry an order was passed by the Block Development Of ficer on 6- 11 -2003 to cancel the name of Shri Shukla from the Kutumb Register of Village Chak Parauna. It has also been stated in the petition that the name of Shri Shukla is recorded at Serial No. 32 in the Voters List of Village Manaura in Tehsil Madiahun of District Jaunpur. This voter list was prepared in the year 2003 and it also shows that the Photo Identity Card No. of Shri Shukla from that place is UP 48-254-0183019. It has also been mentioned that Shri Shukla was holding the post of Block Pramukh of Block Basanthi District Jaunpur and on the basis of the aforesaid entries, THE Chief Development Officer, Jaun pur has also issued a certificate that Shri Shukla is a resident of Village Manaura District Jaunpur. It has, there fore, been contended that Shri Shukla was not eligible and therefore, the panel prepared by the Dealer Selection Com mittee on 4-11-2003, deserves to be set-aside and a fresh panel should be prepared. It has also been contended that even otherwise, the marks have not been correctly awarded to the petitioner by the Dealer Selection Committee. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Corporation it has been stated that pursuant to the receipt of the complaint regarding the eligibility of Shri Shukla, the matter was investigated by the Senior Manager Networking Planning N. Z. and thereafter a Field Information Report was submitted mentioning therein that Shri Shukla had furnished false information regarding the residence certificate and that in fact he was not a resident of Chak Parauna Dis trict Sant Ravidas Nagar. The said report was furnished after scrutinizing the records issued by the District Ad ministration. It has also been stated that the Chief Development Officer/lncharge District Magistrate, Jaunpur had also is sued a certificate that Shri Shukia was a permanent resident of District Jaunpur and that even in the Voter List of District Jaunpur the name of Shri Shukla ap pears at Serial No. 32. The counter-af fidavit further mentions that Shri Shukla was, therefore, not eligible to be granted the dealership of Diesel and Petrol at Western End of Gopiganj at National Highway 3 District Ravi Das Nagar.;