^- %- u' ^a^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ?WSSWSiSSS:SWWW ^!WK SS9S HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR. CHHATTISGARH SINGLE BENCH: HOM'BLE SHRi S.R. NAYAK, CJ. WRiT PETjTiON N0.1620 OF 2006 M/s Mangalam Sen/ice, Through Proprietor Nirmaia Devi Agrawal, W/b D.K. Agrawai, Aged about 40 years, R/o Kharora, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Vs. RESPONDENTS 1. iBP Company Limited, Through Divisional Office, Ground Fioor, Chawii Towers, Meera Datar Road, Near Bottie House, Shankar Nagar, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2. Union of India, Through Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum & Naturai Gas, Shastri Bhavan, New Deihi. Mr. Prashant Mishra, iearned Sr. Advocate, with Mr. V.R. Tiwari, iearned counsel for the petitionsr. Thakur Vijay Singh, Searned Addl. Solicitor Generai with Mr. S.S. Rajput, learned counsei for respondent No.1. Mr. Goutam Bhaduri, iearned counsel for respondent No.2. (Passed on 5tn April, 2006) The petitioner has established a retail outlet near Kharora Bus Stand in pursuance of the letter of intent granted in the year 2005. When the matter stood thus, the first respondent has floated tender cailing for applications for establishing another outlet within 1 % kiiometer of the outlet established by the pefitioner. The complaint is that as per the norms fixed &y the first respondent - Company itse.lf fresh outiet cannot be allowed to be sstablished within the radius of ten kiiometers from the existlng outlet. So atteging, the inten/ention of the Court is sought. At the time of hearing, Mr. Prashant Mishra, learned Sr. counsei for the petitioner f\ SiB ^ss^^^s- '^^iS^'MSSSS, i-iie.^'OiSiimnaa •^. ,'.^' ^ ^-^' l:"'.r L.';V'^" £.'j^^;.(a^.'^.:?'i^^ ^..^^- '•^'^. rJ;'..^;.^'T.JT^-^'^ij^BJ^ •^ 1 would also submit that the fresh outlet cannot be allowed to be established, because, the proposed site is in the neighbourhood of State Highway No.37 and State Highway No.9. The petitioner without raising these objections before the flrst respondent - Company has straightaway approached this Court. The first respondent has yet to consider the tenders received by it and consider them on merit and in accordance with (2) Having heard the learned counsei for the parties, 1 think that \^L-t. ends of justice would be met by permitting the petitioner to lodge W objections against estabiishment of the fresh outiet near Kharora Bus Stand before the first respondent - Company and directing the first respondent - Company to consider She same before taking final decision on the proposed estabiishment ofthe outlet. (3) !n that view of the matter, 1 dispose of the writ petition u^:'^e'y) permitting the petitioner to submit his objections in the form of ce^n representation to the first respondent - Company against the proposed estabiishment ofthe outtet near Kharora Bus Stand. Such representation shall be filed before the first respondent by the petitioner within a week. The first respondent - Company is directed to consider the objections of the petitioner and any other objection that may be filed by others, in accordance with law before fina!!y declding whether the additiona! outlet shouid be permitted to establish near the Bus Stand at Kharora. No costs. S&l- Cbief3usuce \ st.'