J.C. Verma, J. - (1.) Both the above noted writ petitions are disposed of by this common order and for the disposal of both the writ petitions, the facts of the case of Tejumal v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1069/90 are being taken into consideration.
(2.) Indian Oil Corporation had invited applications as per advertisement published in Dainik Navjyoti dated 10.1.1987 for allotment of High Speed Diesel (HSD) retail outlet at Kekri-Nasirabad High Way in village Sarwar. The petitioner Tejumal already having experience in the line had applied for the said dealership. The petitioner had also supplied information to the respondent in regard to his finance and finance required for installation of petrol pump for running the dealership as narrated in para 4 of the petition. He had also submitted certain affidavits of Girdhari Lal and Vadhumal for their willingness to extend the advances to the petitioner. It is stated by the petitioner that before the allotment and to secure certain financial help he had entered into a partner-ship deed on 26.4.1989 vide Annexure 5 with one Shri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari. However, after coming to know about the character of said Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, the petitioner had withdrawn from the partnership on 22.4.1989 as per document attached as Annexures 6-A and 6-B. The petitioner was approved as a best candidate for dealer-ship and he was directed to proceed with the arrangement of acquisition of land covered by Khasra No. 1984/2 for installation of the Petrol Pump vide communication dated 3.9.1989 by the Assistant Manager, Devi Singh posted at Ajmer. Upto 22.5.1989, the petitioner did not hear any further communication from the Indian Oil Corporation when vide Annexure 7 he was informed to be available on 23/24th of may at home. He was interviewed by two officers Devi Singh and Bharat Singh both Assistant Managers of 1 he respondent Indian Oil Corporation. The petitioner had told the officers that he had already acquired the land of 4 Bighas and 12 Biswas abutting, State High-way near Sarwar covered by Khasra No. 1984/2 (Sewai Chak). He had also applied under Section 90(a) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1950 read with Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment, Conversion and Regularisation of Agricultural Land for Construction of Cinema, Hotel or for Establishment of Petrol Pump) Rules, 1978 and a report was made that the land purchased by the petitioner was free from all disabilities, and can he allotted for the purpose of Petrol Pump. The Municipal Board, Sarwar had also issued 'No Objection' in case of the land covered by Khasra No. 1984/2 in question as per Annexure 10. A certificate of being bonafide resident was also produced by the petitioner. In addition to above, the petitioner had produced the documentary evidence in respect of his finance as narrated in para 7.7 to 7.11.
(3.) After satisfying themselves the officers of the Indian Oil Corporation reported in favour of the petitioner Tejumal and he was granted a letter of intent dated 22.6.1989 (Annex. 16) on certain conditions. It was mentioned in the letter of intent that the petitioner was supposed to make arrangements for the land and from amongst other things, the petitioner should make arrangement for ill finances and other arrangements for opening the Retail Outlet Dealership within four months from the date of issue of letter. The petitioner requested the officers to visit the site for its approval. For the reason that the construction was to he made at the expenses of the petitioner, but with the approval of the Indian Oil Corporation Officers, the petitioner offered his entire sum needed for construction of the complex. The petitioner had made all preparations for the construction of Petrol Pump and had been communicating with the officers as is clear from Annexurc-17 to the writ petition. But all of a sudden on 11 9.1989 he was informed to stop further progress in acquiring the land and other facilities, for the establishment of Petrol Pump. The petitioner represented against such an action of the Indian Oil Corporation. He made representation, but no reply was received. It was stated by the petitioner that he had not committed any breach of any term except that he had entered into a partner-ship deed before the issuance of L.O.I. Annexure 16 with one Pradeep Kumar Tiwari which was immediately terminated. He had also submitted that the entering into a partner-ship was even otherwise not a dis-qualification for allotment of Petrol Pump. Vide Annexure 23 the petitioner was informed that there are certain compliance against him in regard to partnership entered into by him with Pradeep Kumar Tiwari and he was asked to be present on 6.12.1989 for necessary discussion withal) the necessary documents. It is stated by the petitioner that as is clear from Annexure-24 even the partner-ship had since been terminated before issuance of letter Annexure-23 and Pradeep Kumar had even issued a legal notice to the petitioner on 10.7.1989.;