SQUADRON LEADER KASHI NATH SINGH RETD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As measure of rehabilitation, the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India, formulated a policy reserving 7.5 percent of the oil product agencies i.e. LPG Agency, petrol pumps and kerosene oil agencies, for certain categories of defence personnel. Pursuant to this policy Indian Oil Corporation, respondent No. 4, issued an advertisement on or about 9/10/l985 inviting applications for awardinag. distributorship of INDANE for Buxar, District Bhojpur, Bihar, from amongst the candidates belonging to (i) Defence Personnel who are permanently and severely disabled either in war or in military duty during peace time, (ii) Widows and motherless dependents of Defence Personnel whose husbands/guardians are killed while on military duty either in war or peace, <PG>311</PG> (iii) Extremely deserving cases of ex-servicemen who have no means of livelihood. The advertisement prescribed the following eligibility conditions:

(2.) . In response to the said advertisement several applications were received by respondent No. 4 which were forwarded to the Oil Selection Board for evaluation.- Five candidates including the petitioner Squadron Leader Kashi Nath Singh (Retd.) and Sh. Janardan Choubey, respondent No. 9, were called for interview. The Oil Selection Board after interviewing the candidates formed a penal consisting of two candidates, namely Janardan Choubey, respondent No. 9 and one Anand Prakash. Ultimately Indian Oil Corporation, respondent No. 4 issued a letter of intent dated 15/1/1988, offering distributorship of INDANE at Buxar to Janardan Choubey, respondent No. 9.

(3.) . Feeling aggrieved the petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing the Letter of Intent dated 15/1/1988 issued to respondent No. 9 in respect of allotment of LPG Agency at Buxar (Bihar) out of the reserved defence category quota and prohibiting respondents No. 2, 4, 5 and 6 from alloting the said agency in favour of respondent No. 9. He also prayed for .a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing respondents No. 1 to 6 to allot the said LPG Agency to the petitioner.