- (1.) Km. Kalawati Yadav is before this Court with following relief:- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 29.03.2016 passed by the Respondent No.1; (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 24.06.2015 passed by the Respondent No.4; (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 12.03.2015 passed by the Respondent No.2; (iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to issue letter of intent to the petitioner; (v) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case; (vi) Award costs in favour of the petitioner throughout.
(2.) As per record this much is reflected that the Indian Oil Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "IOCL") issued an advertisement in various newspapers including "Dainik Jagran" on 26.10.2011, inviting applications for the appointment of Retail Outlet Dealers throughout the State. The present dispute is with regard to the location namely Kandharapur in District Azamgarh (Sl. No.586). The said location was advertised under physically handicapped category. In pursuance of the said advertisement, the petitioner having requisite qualification and fulfilling all the terms and conditions submitted her application form for the said location within time. It is sought to be contended that she had submitted her registered sale deed executed by Ram Ashrey in favour of the petitioner for the period of 29 years and 11 months for an area of 14400 sq. ft. It has been contended that the IOCL duly considered her application and after scrutinizing her application form asked the petitioner to be present for interview on 27.07.2012. It has also been averred in the writ petition that at the time of interview only two persons; one petitioner and another Sri. Lalji Prasad Gaur had appeared before the said interview board and the petitioner was declared empaneled candidate with 54.17 marks and another candidate Sri. Lalji Prasad Gaur was declared unqualified as he failed to obtain minimum 50 marks, which was required.
(3.) From the record it is also reflected that the petitioner was declared as first empaneled candidate without awarding marks under the head "land and infrastructure". Being aggrieved the second candidate namely Sri. Lalji Prasad Gaur had filed a grievance petition on 24.08.2012 and raised two grievances:- (i) The physically handicapped certificate submitted by the petitioner is forged. (ii) He had been wrongly awarded "0" marks under the head "Credit parameter".;