M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. Indrajeet Sinha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. V.R. Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf or respondent No. 5 and the learned Counsel appearing for the Union of India and the State of Jharkhand.
(2.) IN this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the "No Objection Certificate" [In short NOG] issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh on 31.12.2003 in favour of respondent No. 5, M/s. Reliance Industries, Ltd, Ranchi to install retail outlet on National Highway No. 2, G.T. Road, near Barhi in the district of Hazaribagh and also for quashing the order dated 3.6.2005 passed by the Deputy Commissioner. Hazaribagh whereby he has permitted both the petitioner and the private respondent No. 5 to carry on their business of petrol outlet in the said place. Petitioner 'scase is that he was granted NOG by the Deputy Commissioner on 12.9.2003 for staring a petrol pump in G.T. Road near Barhi. It is stated that although the Government of India issued guidelines and restrained from opening fuel outlet within the distance of 300 meters from one outlet to another outlet but the Deputy Commissioner. Hazaribagh issued NOC to respondent No. 5 for opening fuel outlet within the distance of 300 mintcrs.
(3.) EARLIER the petitioner moved this Court for the same relief i.e. for quashing the NOC dated 31.12.2003 issued in favour of respondent No. 5 for opening retail outlet in the said place. That writ petition being WPC No. 1607 of 2005 was dismissed on 6.4.2005. However it was observed in the said order that if the petitioner has any grievance, he may approach the Deputy Commissioner. Hazaribagh who shall consider the grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate order. Pursuant to the aforesaid observation the petitioner approached the Deputy Commissioner. Hazaribagh and put his grievance by filing representation. The Deputy Commissioner, by the impugned order dated 3.6.2005. disposed of the representation in accordance with the guide lines issued by Union of India and directed both the petitioner and respondent No. 5 to carry on their business after constructing a parallel road within six months.;