// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10476/2008 Jagdish Jindal S/o Shri Chauth Mal Ji Versus Union of India and Others Date of Order ::: 22.09.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Harish Kumar, Counsel for petitioner #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition with a prayer that an appropriate writ, order or direction may be issued directing the respondents to extend the job contract of the petitioner by one year more and they may further be directed to continue him the supply of motor spirit (MS) and high-speed- diesel (HSD) at the retail outlet situated in Balaji Market, Kota. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the respondent Indian Oil Corporation entered into a contract with the petitioner for maintenance and haulage of retailed outlet for a period of one year effective from 1st September, 2007, which // 2 // expired on 31st August, 2007, but there was a specific Clause No.4 that the said contract can be renewed for similar period of one year by mutual consent. The petitioner gave representation dated 25th August, 2008 (Annexure-2) to the General Manager (Rajasthan) Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur, but, without deciding the same, one Shri Jai Kumar Dhaka, SO, (RS), Kota SA, vide its letter dated 29th August, 2008 (Annexure-3) asked the petitioner to handover the COCO Petrol Pump, Balaji Market, Kota. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and examined the impugned documents including the contract, annexed with the writ petition. It appears from the contract (Annexure- 1) that there is Clause No.4 to the effect that the contract will be for a period of one year effective from 1st September, 2007, with an option for renewal thereof for similar period of one year by mutual consent. No doubt, the term of contract has expired on 31st August, 2007 but when a representation/application has been given by the petitioner then it was a duty of the respondents to consider and decide the same first. Although the contract was to be extended only on the basis of mutual consent // 3 // but whether the respondents are ready and willing to extend the contract, or not, a specific order should be passed particularly when a representation/application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner. In these circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of at this stage itself with a liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh representation with further direction to respondent Indian Oil Corporation to consider and decide the same. Ordered accordingly. The writ petition is disposed of. The respondent Indian Oil Corporation is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner at the earliest. It will be open for the petitioner to move fresh representation and in case the same is filed within a period of seven days from today then the same will be considered and decided at the earliest but not later than 15 days from the date of receipt thereof. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//