IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7186 of 2010 Tirupati Kumar Sinha, son of Rampati Kumar Sinha, Resident of Mohalla- A/88 Kankarbagh Housing Colony P.S. Kankarbagh, District-Patna. …. …. Petitioner. Versus 1. The Union of India through Secretary Oil and Natural Gas Department, New Delhi. 2. The Indian Oil Corporation through its General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation, Bihar State Office, 5th Floor, Loknayak Bhawan, Frazer Road, Patna. 3. The General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation, 5th Floor Lok Nayak Bhawan, Frazer Road, Patna. 4. Sr. Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Indian Oil Corporation, Block- A, Maurya Lok Complex (3rd Floor Dak Bunglow Road, Patna-1. …. … Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Basant Kumar Choudhary, Senior Advocate. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. K.D.Chatterji, Senior Advocate. Mr. Amlesh Kumar Verma, Advocate. -------- 07/ 01.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents-Union of India and its authorities. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging letter no. PDO/RS/HFS dated 31.03.2010 (Annexure- 2) issued by the Senior Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Indian Oil Corporation, Patna (respondent no.4) terminating the dealership of petitioner’s retail outlet at Kumhrar, Patna and for other ancillary reliefs. 3. The petitioner has claimed that the order of termination was passed on the assumption that after receipt of notice dated 20.01.2010 (Annexure-F) sent by the respondents, the petitioner did not reply and hence the impugned order of - 2 - termination was passed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notice might have been sent by the Corporation but it was not received by the petitioner, rather it was received by his brother’s wife who was inimical to the petitioner and hence she did not give it to the petitioner. 4. Merely on that point, this writ petition is being disposed of quashing the impugned letter of termination dated 31.03.2010 (Annexure-2) due to absence of proper notice to the petitioner. This order is being passed without any prejudice to the claim of the respondents fully stated in their counter affidavit. 5. The said notice has been annexed as Annexure-F to the counter affidavit of the respondents which had been served upon learned counsel for the petitioner as far back as on 18.05.2010 and hence the petitioner now has full information and knowledge of the said notice. Thus, the petitioner is directed to submit his reply to the said notice before the Senior Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Indian Oil Corporation, Patna (respondent no.4) within fifteen days from today, whereafter the said respondent shall pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within one month without being prejudiced by any observation made in this order. Sunil (S. N. Hussain, J.)