IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9362 of 2009 SHRIMATI MAMTA SINGH Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- 3 13.8.2009 On 7.8.2009 this court heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties in detail and fixed this case on 10.8.2009 for final order. On previous date, a prayer was made for pass over of the case. As the arguments were heard in detail and the case is fixed for final order, this court as such is disposing of this case. It appears that pursuant to the advertisement made by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd on 29.6.2000 the petitioner and other candidates applied for distributorship for various places including Sonbarsa. As there was a report of some foul play on large scale, a question regarding sanctity of allotment of distributorship was raised in the Parliament and pursuant to the direction of Hon’ble Prime Minister, the Ministry of Petroleum cancelled all allotments. The allotment was challenged in the Hon’ble Apex Court. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Onkarlal Bajaj disposed of all the petitions by setting aside the order of cancellation of allotment dated 9.8.2002 passed by the Central Government and appointed a Committee consisting of Hon’ble retired Judges to examine 413 cases of allotment including the one issued to Smt. Pushpa Lata. The committee after hearing the complainant and the allottees recommended for cancellation of allotment of dealership to a 2 number of allottees including Smt. Pushpa Lata who was allotted distributorship for the Sonbarsa block. The Hon’ble Apex Court on perusing and considering the report of the Committee found the allotment of Smt. Pushpa Lata and some others to be tainted with poltical connection and as such the same were cancelled. The petitioner submits that as the Hon’ble Apex Court found the allotment of Smt. Pushpa Lata to be tainted, he being the second in the merit list ought to have been allotted the distributorship. Petitioner also prays for quashing the advertisement dated 19.1.2009 published in daily Hindi the ‘Hindustan’ for inviting application for allotment of LPG distributorship in respect of Sonbarsa block. Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd submits that the company has taken a policy decision that in all such cases where distributorship has been cancelled pursuant to the order of Hon’ble Apex Court, fresh allotment would be done by way of fresh advertisement and as such the advertisement dated 19.1.2009 was published in daily Hindi the ‘Hindustan’ in respect of the allotment of distributorship of other blocks as well. He further submits that pursuant to the advertisement the petitioner in fact appeared and participated in the tender process and she was not selected in the interview. It is unfortunate that the petitioner has not made any statement in the writ petition that pursuant to the advertisement she had filed her application and in fact after filing of this writ petition 3 KHAN she appeared and participated in the tender process and she was not selected in the interview. Withholding of such facts from court by the petitioner is deprecated. On this score this writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Another point that has been raised by the petitioner is that on cancellation of allotment of Smt. Pushpa Lata by the Hon’ble Apex Court, as she was second in the merit list she would be entitled for allotment of distributorship of Sonbarsa block. The claim of the petitioner is full of fallacy. Once the Hon’ble Apex Court has found the allotment of distributorship of IOCL to be tainted with political consideration the entire process of allotment of distributorship of the block concerned in question also stands vitiated. Thus on this score also the petitioner has no claim for appointment of distributorship. For the reasons aforesaid, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. (S.P.Singh,J)