HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No. 4351 of 2010 Date: 25.2.2010 Between: B. Syamala devi. Petitioner. And Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., .. Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No. 4351 of 2010 ORDER: The respondent issued the notification dated 8.10.2009 inviting applications for appointment of a dealer for a petroleum outlet at Allagadda of Kurnool District. The petitioner submitted her application with the necessary enclosures. Through a communication dated 5.2.2010 the respondent informed the petitioner that her application has been rejected on the ground that there is a discrepancy as to her marital status. It is said to be on account of contradictory statements in the application and the affidavit. The petitioner states that she is married to Sri P.C. Reddy and that fact was clearly mentioned in the application form. Her case is that the form of affidavit prescribed by the respondent is such that that the alternative provided for married and unmarried persons cannot be struck off and the entire affidavit was reproduced indicating that the petitioner is married to Sri P.C. Reddy. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. In addition to furnishing various particulars on the aspects mentioned in the application, an applicant is required to file a notarised affidavit as prescribed in Appendix-A. The introductory portion of the affidavit contains the particulars of the deponent, i.e., name, age, place of residence etc. The petitioner has clearly stated her name and the name of her husband together with the age and place of residence. The second paragraph of the affidavit contains two alternatives. The first is for unmarried persons and the second is for married ones. In neither of them, any blanks are to be filled. The petitioner did not strike off any of them. No instructions are given to strike off, the irrelevant sub-paragraphs. In a way, it can be said that the very form is defective. The only ground mentioned in the impugned letter is that the petitioner is unmarried as per the contents of the affidavit whereas in the application she is described as married. The inference drawn by the respondents is wrong. The reason is that the petitioner stated in the beginning of the proforma affidavit itself that she is married to P.C. Reddy. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned letter is set aside. The respondent is directed to accept the application of the petitioner and consider her case along with other eligible candidates. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY,J DATE: 25.2.2010 pnb