IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12323 of 2011 Arshad Kamal son of Md. Kamaluddin Ahmad, resident of Village- Phenhara, Post Office& Police Station-Phenhara, District-East Champaran. .....Petitioner Versus 1. M/S Baharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman & Managing Director having its registered office at 4 & 6, Curimbhoy Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001. 2. Area Marketing Manager, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., 3rd Floor, Ashiayana Chamber, Exhibition Road, Patna. 3. The Territory Manager, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. at & P.O. Papaur Barauni, District-Begusarai. 4. Dealer Selection Committee, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., 3rd Floor, Ashiayana Chamber, Exhibition Road, Patna. 5. The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, East Champaran. 6. The Circle Officer, Phenhara Anchal, East Champaran. 7. Md. Saiyed Alam son of Md. Makki Alam, resident of Village- Phenhara, Police Station-Phenhara, District-East Champaran. .....Respondents ---------------------------------- 03 23.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This writ petitioner has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:- (i) For setting aside the Statement of Performance (result) dated 13.06.2011 as notified in connection with interview held on 13.06.2011 for the retail outlet dealership of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. for the location Phenhara Bazar, District-East Champarant, Bihar under open category having Marketing Plan Rural. (ii) For publishing a fresh Statement of Performance after deducting marks wrongly awarded to respondent no. 7 under the head ‘Capability to provide land and other facilities’ for the reason that the petitioner being owner of the offered land is entitled for - 2 - primacy over the respondent no. 7 whose ‘lease deed’ in favour of offered land itself is illegal and invalid in the eye of law. (iii) In consequence thereof commanding the respondent corporation to issue LOI in favour of the petitioner who is second and only other empanelled candidate for the aforesaid location. (iv) For any other writ/writs, order/orders in the facts and circumstances of the case. (v) For commanding the respondent no. 5 not to issue NOC in favour of respondent no. 7 for installing the retail outlet at location in question and further for commanding the respondent corporation not to issue LOI in favour of respondent no. 7 till the final disposal of the case. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has filed a complaint dated 05.07.2011 (Annexure-6) to the Area Marketing Manager, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Patna (respondent no. 2), pointing out that the income certificate of respondent no. 7 was false, which can be verified from the Circle Officer concerned and also challenged the validity of lease deed submitted by respondent no. 7, which was not executed by all the owners of the land. 4. In that view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition in order to press his aforesaid complaint before the above named respondent. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. The said respondent no. 2 is directed to dispose of the complaint of the petitioner in accordance - 3 - with law expeditiously preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, if not yet disposed of. 6. Furthermore, if letter of intent is not yet granted in favour of respondent no. 7, the same shall not be issued to him until the complaint of the petitioner is decided. Safik (S.N.Hussain, J.)