WP 9562/10 1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.9562/2010 Varsha Madhukar Dhamane V/s Regional Manager, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation, Aurangabad. ________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | Shri M.R. Dhamane, Advocate for petitioners. Shri V.D. Salunke, Advocate for respondent. CORAM: D.B. BHOSALE & S.B. DESHMUKH, JJ. Date: 13.06.2011 Learned counsel for the parties. By this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking direction to the Regional Manager, HPCL, Aurangabad, to accept her application for the retail outlet dealership for the location at Sr.No.92 (Sarola station, Dist.Ahmednagar). The petitioner's application seems to have been rejected on the ground that she did not deposit the fee provided for in the advertisement. According to the petitioner, she was obliged to pay Rs. WP 9562/10 2 100/- only as non refundable application fee, whereas according to the respondent, the petitioner was required to pay Rs.1,000/- for the location at Sr.No.92. The respondent has filed reply affidavit and in paragraphs 4.3 and 4.4., he has stated thus : "4.3 That, clause No.2 of the advertisement speaks about the eligibility criteria. As per clause No.2(f), it is made clear that out of 1 to 150 locations (for Aurangabad region), the locations at serial Nos.13, 45, 62, 74 to 98, 100 to 140 are advertised for award of dealership and setting up Retail outlets called "HP RAJA" whereas locations at serial Nos. 141 to 150 are advertised for award of dealership and setting up Retail outlets called "HAMARA PUMP". 4.4 That the petitioner had applied for the dealership of the retail outlet at "Sarola Station" which is shown in the advertisement at serial No.92. Being so, as explained above, as per clause 2(f), it falls under the category "HP RAJA". This respondent refers to clause 13 of the advertisement which specifically states that the applicants for "HAMARA PUMP" only have to submit the application fee of Rs.100/- along with the application form. However the petitioner, though applied for "HP RAJA" had submitted WP 9562/10 3 her application form along with application fee of Rs.100/- which is in violation of clause 13 of the advertisement. Hence, the application was liable to be rejected as per clause (m) of the GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS of the advertisement." There is no dispute that the petitioner applied for the location at Sr.No.92, which was advertised for award of dealership and setting up of dealership outlet called "H.P. RAJA". In view thereof and for the statements made on affidavit, we find no substance in the challenge raised in the writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. (S.B. Deshmukh, J.) (D.B. Bhosale, J.) Dt/- 13.06.2011 ndk/c136116