.??V^B^e-f ...-^%f<^) '?-"''^wlw"...--<'^ 1 ^<7 ^^•••-"^' T^-^l IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.fCI No. r7 /2011 ^) PETITIONER RESPQNDENTS Amit Singh Dev, S/o. Ajeet Pratap Singh, aged about 34 years, R/o. Lakhanpur, Surguja, District Surguja (C.G.) VERSUS l] Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, through: its General Manager, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Bharat Bhawan, 4 & 6, Currimbhoy Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai. 2] Territory Manager (Retail), Raipur, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Veer Narayan Complex, Nagar Ghadi Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) 3] Area Marketing Manager, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Office Complex, Block-A, Gautam Nagar, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 4] Collector, Surguja, District Surguja (C.G.) <••'"' 5] Abhishek Jaiswal, S/o. Rajendra Jaiswal, aged about 22 years, R/o.Juna Lakhanpur, District Surguja (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1 '<«&'^j HIGH COURT OF CHHATriSGARH AT BU.ASPUR PETITIONER WRIT PETmON fONo. 3776 of2011 Amit Singh. RESPONDENTS t.1 VERSUS Bharat Petroleum Corporation Lunited &0thers. WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF JHE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA SB-. Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agirihotri, J. Present: Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Sourabh Dangi, Advocate forthe caveator/respondent No.5. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No. 4. ORDERfORAL) (Passed on 15th day ofJuly, 2011) 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks following reliefs: "1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, order/orders, direction/du-ections, quashmg the selection (Annexure P-13) of respondent No. 5 for allotment of dealership of retail outlet c£Bharat Petroleum Coq?oration Limited at Lakhanpur (Rural), District Sui^uja (C.G.) and Ihe respondent No. l to 3 may kindly be directed to reconsider the entire matter wilh regaa-d to allotment of dealership of retail outlet of Bharat Petroleum Coiporation Limited at Lakhanpur (Rural), District Surguja in accordance wifli the Rules, Regulations and GuideUnes i.e. Armex. P- 11& P-12. 2. That, Ifais Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct Ihe respondent No. 1 to 3 to consider and decide the representation ofthe petitioner and the Hon'ble Court uaay kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No. 1 to 3 to conduct proper inquiry on the allegations leveled against Ifae respondent No.5. 3. That, tius Hon'ble Court may Idndly be pleased to direct the respondent No. 1 to 3 to initiate fresh proceedings for allotment of dealership of retail outlet of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited at Lakhanpur, District Surguja (C.G.). 4. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other reliefl;s) which is deeiiKd fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and eircumstanees ofthe case." ;9' a.1 2. Being aggrieved by the decision of the respondent No. 1, Ifae petitioner has made a complaint to the oil company under clause 19(a) oftiie Procedure for Selection of Petrol/Diesel Retail Outlet Dealers. Shri Paranjpe, leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that several complaints raising his pievances have been made on 04.07.201 1, 08.07.2011 and 09.07.2011. 3. Clause 19(a) ofthe Procedure fcu- Selectioa ofPetrol/Diesel Retail Outlet Dealers reads as under: "19 Grievance/CQmplaint redressal system: (a) An aggrieved person may send hialier coinplaint to the oil company at the address ofthe eustomer service cell displayed at the nearest retail outlet of the concemed oil eompany. Complaints can also be lodged on the website of the oil company. Conylaints against dealer selection received afler 30 days from the date of publication ofthe merit panel after the ititerview wiU not be considered/entertamed under anv circumstances. Anonymous/pseudonymous complamts will not be investigated and will be filed without taking any action on the same. On receipt of a complaint, a letter will be sent by the oil company to tfae complainant tfirough Registered Post advisiag the complainant to subinit details of allegation with a view to priina facie substantiate the allegations alongwith supporting documents, if any, within 30 days. The complainant will be clearly advised that the oil company will examine the complaint and if it is established that the complaint does not have any substance, be/she may be liable for legal action. The oU company will examine response of the complainant and if it is found that the complaint does not have specifie and verifiable allegations, the same will be filed." 4. It appears that the petitioner, without waiting for a reasonabie time to enable tiie oil company to take any decision on his representation, has approached this Court on tiie ground that there is no expression ofany steps being taken by the authorities. HSJ ^ 6. This petition is premature as the petitioner has not waited for response ofthe oil eompany, as 30 days as prescribed has not yet completed. Thus, fhe petition is dismissed as being premature. Needless to say that if grievance of the petitioner still survives after decision ofthe respondent authorities, the petitioner is always at liberty to raise the issue before the appropriate fonun. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Amit