IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11239 of 2010 1. VISHWAJEET KUMAR, S/O SHARDANAND YADAV, R/O MOHALLA AZIZ GHAT,POST AND P.S. BIHARSHARIF,DISTRICT-NALANDA. Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, OIL AND NATURAL GAS, GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2. THE INDIAN OIL CORPORATION THROUGH THE CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR, REGD. OFFICE G-9 ALI YAVAR JUNG MARG, BANDRA EAST MUMBAI. 3. THE CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR,INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., G-9 ALI YAVAR JUNG MARG, BANDRA EAST MUMBAI. 4. THE GENERAL MANAGER,INDIAN OIL CORPORATION, BIHAR STATE OFFICE, LOK NAYAK JAI PRAKASH BHAWAN DAK BUNGLOW ROAD,PATNA. 5. THE SENIOR AREA MANAGER,INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED, MARKETING DIVISION (EASTERN REGION),1ST FLOOR , SAHI BHAWAN, EXHIBITION ROAD,PATNA-800001. 6. THE D.G.M (L.P.G.),BIHAR STATE OFFICE,INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., LOK NAYAK JAI PRAKASH BHAWAN ,5TH FLOOR, DAK BUNGLOW CHOWK,PATNA. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Nagendra Kumar Singh,Advocate For the I.O.C.L. : M/s. K.D. Chatterjee and Amlesh Kumar Verma, Advocates. ----------- 2. 21.7.2010 The petitioner is aggrieved by the letter dated 29.6.2010 (Annexure-8) issued by respondent No. 5, the Senior Area Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Marketing Division (Eastern Region), Patna by which he has informed the petitioner that the selection process for 2 location Chandi for awarding Indane Distributorship was found to be vitiated on investigation by the competent authority into the complaints received in the preparation of the merit panel and the selection process for the said location would be held again for which the date of interview will be intimated to all eligible candidates on a later date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of the respondent-authorities is arbitrary and unjustified as they have enquired into the complaints behind the back of the petitioner who had been declared as first candidate in the panel earlier. This Court is of the view that it is open to the authorities of the Indian Oil Corporation to have looked into the complaints and on the basis of the findings during the investigation, it is also open to them to reconsider the entire matter. It is not a case where the selection process itself has been cancelled. The petitioner will have full opportunity of presenting his case at the fresh interview which the authorities have intimated by the impugned letter dated 29.6.2010 itself. In the above circumstances, there is no merit in 3 the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. It is however, made clear that the dismissal of the writ petition shall not be held against the petitioner in the consideration of his case by the authorities of the Corporation. S. Pandey ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)