IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.912 of 2009 1. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Block-A, Maurya Lok Complex, 3rd Floor, Dak Bungalow, Road, Patha through the General Manager 2. Senior Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Block-A, Maurya Lok Complex, 3rd Floor, Dak Bungalow, Road, Patha 3. The D.G.M (RS), Madhya Pradesh .. Appellants/Respondents in the writ application Versus 1. Ravi Kumar, son of Shri Shashi Bhushan Kumar Singh, resident of village Mukundpur, P.S.-Ekma, District- Saran 2. Mukesh Kumar Singh, son of late Brij Nandan Singh, resident of Village Mukundpur, P.S.- Ekma, District Saran ..Respondents ----------- 12 19.04.2011 This appeal is being disposed of at the stage of admission itself with the consent of parties. The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 11.05.2009 passed in C.W.J.C. No.5263 of 2007. The respondent herein is the writ petitioner. The case of the appellant is that on 14.08.2005, an advertisement was issued by the appellant-Indian Oil Corporation Limited, a Government of India undertaking inviting applications for setting up a retail outlet dealer at Ekma in the district of Saran, Bihar. There were only two candidates who were shortlisted for 2 being considered for the said dealership as was shown at serial no.1 by the Selection Committee. The letter of intent was issued in favour of the petitioner-respondent herein on 01.03.2006. As per the letter of intent, the petitioner-respondent herein was directed to provide the land as undertaken by them to carry out various constructions activities and complete the same within two months. Again on 16.03.2006, petitioner-respondent herein was directed by the appellant- Corporation to stop all further works on the ground that a compliant was filed against them alleging that a forged income tax return certificate was filed with their application. The reason being that a complaint was filed by some persons stating that on some forged and fabricated document Income Tax return was filed by the petitioner-respondent herein and the letter of intent was recalled on the ground that the Income Tax return submitted by the writ petitioner-respondent herein did not satisfy the condition of advertisement as such his selection at serial no. 1 cannot 3 be sustained. Hence, the petitioner-respondent herein has preferred to file a writ petition in which it was chosen by them to amend the prayer in the writ petition seeking a direction to recall the letter of intent which was allowed. It has been contended by learned counsel for the respondent/petitioner that recalling of the letter of intent on the ground of forged Income Tax return filed by the respondent/petitioner herein for the period 2004-05 cannot be sustained for the reason that there was no such clause in the advertisement when it was published for filing of the Income Tax return for the year 2004-05. The writ petitioner has filed the Income Tax return for the year 2003-04 as the clause in the advertisement indicates that the return for the previous year has to be filed, accordingly, he has complied the same, and hence the letter of intent cannot be recalled. It was contended by learned Sr. counsel for the appellant-Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. before learned Single 4 Judge that duty was cast upon the writ petitioner to comply with the condition of the advertisement, as in the advertisement issued in the year August, 2005 one of the condition was that he has to file Income Tax return certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant for the year 2004-05 which he has not complied, hence, four marks awarded to the writ petitioner cannot be sustained and hence the letter of intent has been recalled. However, the learned single Judge having not agreed with the contention raised by the Indian Oil Corporation, allowed the writ petition, against which the present appeal has been filed. It has been contended before us by learned Standing counsel appearing for Indian Oil Corporation that the advertisement was issued in the month of August 2005 in which one of the condition was that they have to submit the certificate issued by Chartered Accountant with the Income Tax returns for the year 2004-05 but the writ petitioner did not comply with the same. However, he had filed 5 return for the year 2003-04 for which committee has awarded four marks which cannot be sustained. Hence, the action of the Indian Oil Corporation is within the parameters of the advertisement in recalling the letter of intent of writ petitioner on the ground that he did not comply with the condition of the advertisement clause. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner-respondent herein has contended that as per clause of the advertisement issued in the year 2004 letter of intents were issued on 01.03.2006 and 16.03.2006 and the Indian Oil Corporation asked the petitioner to stop the work at the instance of a complaint filed by a person alleging therein that the petitioner had submitted a forged document with the Income Tax returns which fact was enquired into by the officer of the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and it was found to be not correct. The writ petition was field against the order by which the petitioner was asked to stop the work. As letter of intent has been recalled 6 subsequently, a prayer has been made to amend the prayer portion of the writ petition. It has been contended that the writ petitioner has complied the condition of advertisement issued in the year 2005 by which he has to file his return by 31st of October, 2005. One of the clauses in the advertisement goes to show that he requires to submit the income tax return for the previous year along with the certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant. The respondent/petitioner has chosen to file Income Tax return for the previous year i.e. 2003-04 and hence he has obtained four marks by the selection committee which cannot be reviewed by the Indian Oil Corporation as it is the Selection Committee which was entrusted the duty to select the candidate basing on the document and then the writ petitioner has filed such documents basing on he was called for interview and subsequently, the Indian Oil Corporation had no power to review the same. We had the occasion to go through 7 the contents of the advertisement which was issued in the month of August 2005 indicating that the applicant has to submit the income tax return of the previous year along with the certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant. Basing on the same, the writ petitioner has chosen to file Income Tax return for the previous year 2003-04. The contention of the appellant Corporation is that the letter of intent was recalled on the ground that the Income Tax return was filed in the year 2004-05 is not sustainable for the reason that the applicant (respondent herein) has to submit the return in the Income Tax Department by 31st of October 2005 and the respondent/ petitioner is not supposed to file return for the year 2004-05 which is not supposed to have been filed with the Income Tax Department as on the date of submitting the application. This Court is of the opinion, that the applicant has filed the returns of the previous year of 2003-04 and the action of Selection Committee in awarding four marks cannot be reviewed by the Indian Oil 8 Corporation on the ground that he has not filed the income tax returns of year 2004- 05. Under the above circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of learned Single Judge. Accordingly order of the learned Single Judge is confirmed and this appeal is dismissed. Ashwini/- (T. Meena Kumari, J.) (Akhilesh Chandra, J.)