IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Appeal No. 269 of 2011 Sudhanshu Tyagi …………… Appellant Versus Indian Oil Corporation Limited and others .….............. Respondents Present: Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. V.K. Kohli, Senior Advocate with Ms.Vandana Singh, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Coram : Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, Chief Justice Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, Judge Date: 22nd November, 2011 JUDGMENT Barin Ghosh, C. J. (Oral) The application for grant of LPG dealership, as was made by the appellant, was rejected. The action of the said rejection is subject matter of challenge in a writ petition, which is pending in the Court. While the said writ petition has not yet been decided, the subject LPG dealership has been granted in favour of respondent No.4. In a second writ petition, appellant challenged grant of LPG dealership to respondent No.4. This writ petition has been dismissed on the ground that the appellant is not in the race of getting the LPG dealership and, accordingly, he could not challenge the grant of LPG dealership in favour of respondent No.4. Being aggrieved thereby, the present appeal has been preferred contending that in the event the grant in favour of respondent No.4 is a good grant, then the writ petition of the appellant challenging rejection of his application will become infructuous. If that is the legal advice the appellant has received, we can only add that the said advice is an improper advice for we feel that in the event it is held that the rejection of the application of the appellant was improper, the same 2 would go to the root of the matter and, accordingly, the whole exercise of selection would be required to be made afresh. 2. We, accordingly, dismiss this appeal. (U.C. Dhyani, J.) ( Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 22.11.2011 22.11.2011 P. Singh