TEJU RAM Vs. INDIAN OIL CORPN LTD
LAWS(RAJ)-1999-5-35
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on May 03,1999

Teju Ram Appellant
VERSUS
Indian Oil Corpn Ltd Respondents

JUDGEMENT

B.J.SHETHNA,J. - (1.) FOR resolving the controversy between the parties in this matter my learned brother Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan J. on 26.4.1999 directed the respondent No. 2 to produce the confidential documents, pertaining to the selection in the sealed cover before this Court on 3.5.1999 i.e. today. Accordingly, the learned Counsel Sh. A.L. Chopra produced the sealed cover before this court regarding the selection. The Board consisting of the Chairman and two members, the Chairman is the Hon'ble Retired Judge of this Court. There were 10 applicants who were interviewed on 13.1.1999 by the Selection Board and their performance was judged. The marks were given on different heads - 1. Personality, Business of ability Salesmanship 2. Capability to arrange finance 3. Educational general level of intelligence 4. Capability to provide infrastructure and facility 5. General assessment
(2.) FOR the satisfaction of the Court, I have carefully gone through the marks assigned by the Chairman and two members of the Selection Board. Out of 10 applicants the petitioner stands last at No. 10. From the letter dated 13.1.1999 addressed by the Chairman to the Executive Director of IOC New Delhi, it is clear that they have not selected only one person but they have selected three and present respondent No. 4 was at the top. In that letter also it has been stated that field investigation report be carried out in respect of No. 1 candidate (present respondent No. 4) and if he is found suitable necessary action will be taken for issuance of LOI. It is further stated that if the candidate in main panel at No. 1 position is not found suitable for any specific reason matter may be forwarded to the Chairman with full details. Thus, it is clear from the selection process and the result that there is no arbitrariness and the petitioner stands nowhere near to No. 1.
(3.) UNDER the circumstances, I do not see any reason to entertain this petition. Accordingly it fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. The documents produced before this court in the sealed cover may once again be put in sealed cover and handed over to Mr. A.L. Chopra learned Counsel for the respondent IOC. Interim relief granted earlier stands vacated.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.