CWP No.13584 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 13584 of 2009 Date of Decision:- March 16, 2010 Paramjeet Kaur ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and others ...Respondents Present: Mr.Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate for the petitioner. Dr.(Ms.) Urmil Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr.Anil Malhotra, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4. Mr.Arun Bansal, Advocate for respondent No.5. ***** CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No ***** K.KANNAN, J. (ORAL) 1. The sole issue for consideration is whether the petitioner was properly awarded marks for the property, which he claimed in his possession for the selection of Dealers by comparative merits among several contestants. According to the petitioner, he had furnished necessary details, while the objection on behalf of the respondent was that a property which was held in common by the petitioner along with co- owners, had not been shown that he was not an exclusive owner and in CWP No.13584 of 2009 -2- such cases, the affidavits of other co-owners was also necessary. According to the learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation, the application did not forward any such proof of consent of other co-owners and therefore, he had not been awarded any marks for the same. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent also submitted that there is a redressal mechanism available with the Corporation, which would consider any complaint by a candidate, who is not selected and the learned counsel also assures that if such a complaint is given, they shall consider the complaint objectively and take a final decision. He also assures that till such a decision, the commissioning of petrol pump will not be done, as per the guidelines of the Corporation. 3. The statement of learned counsel for the respondent- Corporation is taken on record and the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the Corporation within a period of one week from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, giving such details as relevant for his complaint and the respondent-Corporation will take an objective decision on the basis of complaint as per regulations, before the commissioning of petrol pump is ultimately undertaken,. 4. Subject to these observations aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of. March 16, 2010 (K.KANNAN) Vt JUDGE