IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 18993 of 2001 BETWEEN: Dasari Venkateswarlu @ Eswara Prabhu, S/o. D. Pichaiah, R/o. 7-2, Kavvur Post, Kamayyathopu, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Vijayawada-520 007. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Divisional Manager, Gummidi Pudi L.P.G. Regional Office, Customer Service Centre, H.P.C. Limited, 3rd Floor, Rallamuthu-Natarajam Buildings, 8 Gandhi-Erwin Road, Eggmoor, Chennai-600 008. 2 Dealer Selection Board Vijayawada, G.P.C.L. Tadapalli Installation, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 3 Galib Saheb, Piler, Chittoor District. 4 Munagumma Garu, R/o. Karramchedu Post, Chirala, Prakasam District. 5 Kumara Swamy Garu, S/o. K.C. Ratnavalu Chetty, R/o. Nagari, Chittoor District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.1 & 2 issuing allotment order for L.P.G. Distributorship for Nagari, Chittoor District in favour of Respondent No.3 is illegal, unjust and against the Principles of Natural Justice and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.RAVINDRA BABU Counsel for the Respondents: MR.P.V.SANJAY KUMAR MR. J. PRABHAKAR MR. J.C. KRISHNAIAH MR. N.S. BHASKAR RAO The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioner questions the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in issuing the allotment order for LPG Distributorship for Nagari, Chittoor District in favour of the third respondent as illegal and arbitrary on the ground that he is meritorious than the respondents 3 to 5 and he secured more marks and therefore, he is entitled for allotment of dealership. 2. I have perused the records. The Chairman and a Member conducted the interviews of the candidates. The petitioner secured 122 marks; the third respondent secured 191 marks; the fourth respondent secured 183 marks and the fifth respondent secured 156 marks. The overall marks awarded to the petitioner and the respondents 3 to 5 were based on (i) Personal Ability, Business Ability & Salesman-ship, (ii) Capability to arrange finance, (iii) Educational Qualifications & General Level of Intelligence, (iv) Capability to provide infrastructure and Facility and (v) General Assessment. The third respondent secured more marks than the petitioner and the respondents 4 and 5, therefore, it cannot be said that there was an arbitrary action on the part of the respondents in selecting the third respondent and allotting the LPG Distributorship of Nagari, Chittoor District. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not see any merits in the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J June 9, 2008 DSK