1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4220 OF 2009 Ravindra s/o Nanasaheb Barde - PETITIONER VERSUS The Union of India, Through the Secretary, Petroleum and Natural Gas Department, New Delhi and another - RESPONDENTS ***** Mr.SS Jadhavar, Advocate for Petitioner; Mr.RP Phatke,Standing Counsel for Union of India. Smt.Anjali Dubey, Advocate for Respondent No.2. ----- CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & K.U.CHANDIWAL, JJ. DATE : 17th December, 2009. PER COURT : 1) Heard. 2) The petitioner had in the year 2002 participated in the process of allotment of LPG Distributorship for Shevgaon Town, District Ahmednagar, pursuant to the advertisement issued 2 by the Respondent No.2- The Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (for short, HPCL). 3) The petitioner was empaneled at Serial No.2. As one Vilas Khushalsingh Rajput was placed at Serial No.1 in the selected panel, a Letter of Intent was issued in favour of said VK Rajput and he started running the LPG Distributorship. According to the petitioner, he had raised objection as regards the Caste Certificate submitted by said VK Rajput, claiming himself to be belonging to scheduled tribe. According to the Counsel, the LPG Distributorship was to be allotted to a candidate belonging to a scheduled tribe category. 4) According to Shri Jadhavar, the petitioner pointed out that the selected candidate Shri VK Rajput did not belong to a scheduled tribe, for which twice he filed writ petitions in this Court. The Caste Scrutiny Committee invalidated the tribe claim of said VK 3 Rajput, against which order, he filed Writ Petition No.3420/2005 in High Court and this Court dismissed the said writ petition. Ultimately, due to efforts of the petitioner, the HPCL cancelled the LPG Distributorship of said VK Rajput. 5) It is pertinent to note that the petitioner had filed Writ Petition no. 2508/2007, seeking writ of mandamus to the HPCL to award LPG Distributorship in his favour at the same place, i.e. Shevgaon, Tq. Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar. By an order dated 26th April, 2007, the Division Bench of this Court (Coram: S.J.Vazifdar and P.R.Borkar,JJ.), permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to petitioner to approach the respondent for redressal of his grievance. 6) The learned Counsel submits that thereafter the petitioner pursued the HPCL and saying that since he stands at Sr.No.2 in the 4 list of the panel, the LPG Distributorship be awarded in his favour. However, the HPCL did not accede to the demand of the petitioner. 7) The learned Counsel submits that as fresh advertisement was issued by the company for award of LPG Distributorship at the same place, i.e. Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar, the petitioner has now approached this Court with identical relief, seeking directions to the HPCL to allot LPG Distributorship in his favour. It was one of the contentions of the counsel for the petitioner that in view of communication issued by the Deputy General Manager, HPCL, dated 10th July, 2008 (Exhibit-O to the petition), the period of one year for maintaining the validity of merit panel was not applicable to the candidate belonging to Scheduled tribe. Therefore, the petitioner deserves to be awarded the LPG Distributorship. 8) The respondent-HPCL filed an affidavit 5 in reply. It is clarified that, one year period of the Validity of the Merit Panel has already lapsed and, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to claim such relief. The learned Counsel Mrs. Dubey, appearing for the HPCL, submitted that the clauses contained in the communication dated 10th July, 2008 issued by the Deputy General Manager of HPCL, were wrongly interpreted by the petitioner. In the submission of the counsel, there is no separate policy of having validity for the merit panel for ST category candidates. 9) After considering the submissions advanced by the respective parties and having perused the documents placed on record, we are of the view that the petitioner had approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No.2508/2007 earlier with identical relief, which came to be withdrawn by the petitioner. The petitioner is approaching now after the HPCL has advertised calling applications for allotment of LPG 6 Distributorship afresh. We are not convinced with the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Clause relating to Validity of Merit Panel is not applicable to the candidate belonging to a scheduled tribe. Even otherwise, considering the nature of selection, contractual rights of the parties, in exercise of extra ordinary writ jurisdiction, it would be impermissible for us to extend the period of Validity of the Merit Panel from one year to more than seven years and issue directions to the HPCL to award Distributorship to the petitioner. 10) From the record, it transpires that the petitioner had exerted a lot in establishing his initial grievance that the selected candidate, namely, Vilas Rajput did not belong to a scheduled tribe category and ultimately, according to the petitioner, he succeeded in establishing the same. True it is, but sympathy would not entitle him in law to claim distributorship straightway. It is informed to 7 this Court that the petitioner has not participated in the present selection process. In the result, the petition stands dismissed. 11) We expect the HPCL henceforth to be more vigilant and cautious in respect of the objections, raised by applicants, which go to the root of the matter. 12) The Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Union Ministry for Oil and Natural Gas, New Delhi. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) (NARESH H. PATIL) JUDGE JUDGE bdv/wp4220.09