: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4217 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO.4217 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO.4217 OF 2005 Mohamed Arif Shaikh Ayub ...Petitioner. V/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited & Anr. ...Respondents. Mr.Uday Warunjikar for Petitioner. Mr.M.D.Siodia i/b M/s.Rutamji Ginwala & Co. for Respondents. CORAM: H.L.GOKHALE & CORAM: H.L.GOKHALE & CORAM: H.L.GOKHALE & J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. DATE : 6th June, 2006. DATE : 6th June, 2006. DATE : 6th June, 2006. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Mr.Warunjikar in support of this Petition. Mr. Siodia appears for both the respondents. 2. Petitioner is a sportsman and he is an employee in the Ordinance Factory at Bhusawal, District: Jalgaon. He had applied for allotment of a depot as a kerosene dealer to the respondents. His application was accepted and Letter of Intent was issued on 12th October, 2001. 3. It so happened that subsequently, proceedings were filed in the Apex Court in public interest to point out that there were many irregularities in allotment of kerosene dealership as well as dealership in petroleum depots. Appropriate orders were passed by the Apex Court and then all such dealerships came to be cancelled. The : 2 : Letter of Intent given to the petitioner was cancelled by the respondents by the letter dated 13th August, 2002. 4. The case of the petitioner is that he is not one of those who had indulged into any malpractices nor he had any favouritism in his favour. He, therefore, filed this Writ Petition seeking restoration of his original Letter of Intent. This Petition was filed on 14th June, 2005 and has been pending since then. 5. Mr.Siodia, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents has tendered a copy of the letter dated 27th January, 2003 addressed by the Senior Regional Manager (Retail) of the respondents to the petitioner. He submits that it appears that petitioner has not brought this letter to the notice of his counsel. In paragraph 4 and 5 of this letter, it is stated as follows: "In view of the Supreme Court’s Order dated 20.12.2002, we hereby withdraw and cancel our letter PRR/AJL/LOI dated 13.8.2002. We hereby restore the Letter of Intent PRR/VHG/RET dated 12.10.2001 and request you to comply with the terms and conditions mentioned for commissioning the dealership at the earliest. : 3 : Please note that this letter is subject to the final decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court after it receives the report of the 2 Judge Committee appointed vide their Order dated 20.12.2002 Transferred Case (C) No.80 of 2002-Onkar Lal Bajaj etc. Vs UOI & Anr. etc. along with several SLPs." 6. Mr.Siodia, therefore, states that infact, in view of this letter dated 27th January, 2003, present petition has been worked out. Original Letter of Intent has been restored and petitioner is expected to take necessary steps and comply with terms and conditions mentioned for commissioning dealership in the Letter of Intent dated 12th October, 2001. This letter further states that this letter is subject to the final decision of the Apex Court based on the report of 2 Judge Committee. 7. Mr.Warunjikar states that petitioner is not at all indicted by any such committee. If that is so, surely, he will get benefit of paragraph 4 of this letter subject to the conditions in the Original Letter of Intent dated 12th October, 2001. It is for him to follow up the matter with the respondents. : 4 : 8. The Petition stands disposed of. (H.L.GOKHALE,J.) (H.L.GOKHALE,J.) (H.L.GOKHALE,J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.)