HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU. OWP no. 789/2008 CMP no. 1158/2008 Date of Decision: 04.12.2008 Mohd Maqbool Sofi v. Chairman Indian Oil Corporation and ors. Coram: Mr. JUSTICE J. P. SINGH, JUDGE. Appearing Counsel: For Petitioner : Mr. K. L. Pandita, Advocate. For Respondents: M/s. R. Koul & F. A. Natnoo, Advocates. i) Whether to be reported In Press/Journal/Media: Yes/No. ii) Whether to be reported In Digest/Journal: Yes/No. Petitioner has filed this writ petition questioning Indian Oil Corporation Limited’s communication no. JMDO/LOI/ICHGAM dated 14.07.2008, offering award of Retail Outlet Kissan Seva Kendra Dealership at village Ichgam District Budgam, Jammu and Kashmir, to Manzoor Ahmed Wani-respondent no. 5, besides seeking a direction to the Corporation to reconsider his case for awarding the Retail Outlet Dealership to him. 2 According to the petitioner, the Corporation had acted arbitrarily violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India in omitting to provide opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before awarding Retail Outlet Dealership at village Ichgam to respondent no. 5 when he had been shown at S. No. 1 in the merit panel of the candidates who had sought award of Retail Outlet Dealership in their favour. Respondent-Corporation and Manzoor Ahmed Wani- respondent no. 5 have indicated in their separate objections that the petitioner has no locus standi to question the impugned communication as he was ineligible to compete because of his not fulfilling one of the necessary conditions required for award of Retail Outlet Dealership, i.e., of possessing land at village Ichgam, the notified place which had been earmarked by the Corporation for setting up of a Retail Outlet. The parties were not at variance as to the place where the Retail Outlet had to be set up by the Corporation. The place notified by the Corporation for setting up the Retail Outlet, as admitted by learned counsel for the parties at the time of hearing of the petition, is village Ichgam in District Budgam of Kashmir Province. Petitioner’s learned counsel, Mr. K. L. Pandita, when confronted with the objections of the respondents that the petitioner did not possess any land at the notified place, 3 candidly admitted that the land which the petitioner had offered to set up the Retail Outlet pursuant to the issuance of Advertisement notice, was located at village Zooribagh. Learned counsel, however, submitted that having been placed at S. no. 1 of the merit panel, petitioner was entitled to be heard in the matter before someone else could be considered for allotment of Retail Outlet Dealership at village Ichgam. I do not find any substance in petitioner’s counsel’s submission, in that, having failed to offer land for setting up of Retail Outlet at the notified place, i.e., village Ichgam, the petitioner would have no locus standi to question the allotment of Dealership to the person who had offered land at village Ichgam for setting up of Retail Outlet. Placement of petitioner at S. No. 1 in the merit panel, would not cure his basic ineligibility to compete for securing Retail Outlet Dealership at village Ichgam. Possessing no land in village Ichgam, the place notified by the Indian Oil Corporation for setting up a Retail Outlet (KSK), the petitioner was thus ineligible to compete for the Dealership and hence disentitled to seek consideration for award of the Retail Outlet. His ineligibility, thus, disables him to maintain this writ petition to question the award of Retail Outlet Dealership to Manzoor Ahmed Wani- respondent no. 5. 4 This writ petition, therefore, lacks merit. It is, accordingly, dismissed without any order as to costs. (J. P. Singh ) Judge JAMMU: 04.12 .2008 TILAK, Secy.