IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 5478 of 2010. Decided on: December 13, 2010. Anju Sharma …..Petitioner. Versus Union of India & Ors. ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the petitioner: Mr.Dushyant Dadwal, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms.Sandeep Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.1. Mr.Rahul Mahajan, counsel for respondents No.2 and 3. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayer: “It is therefore respectfully prayed that the present petition may kindly be allowed and he impugned annexure P-5, the mark sheet prepared by the respondents on 14-8-2010 by which the respondent No.4 has been shown to have secured higher marks in comparison to the petitioner who is only having the land in the area of advertisement, keeping in view her documents/certificates appended with the application form, may please be quashed & set-aside by issuing a writ of Certiorari, which is quite illegal, arbitrary & has been issued in her favor contrary to the selection procedure & policy & guidelines, with the further directions to the respondents to produce the complete record, pertaining to the present case including the survey report, feasibility report, concurrence of the other oil companies & the selection criteria.” 2. The learned counsel appearing for respondents No.2 and 3, on instructions, submits that on verification of the records with reference also to the allegations raised in the writ petition, it is seen that certain inadvertent mistakes have crept in while awarding marks. Therefore, it is submitted that the Selection Committee intends to have a re-look into the 2 matter and consider the same afresh with reference to the records and documents available with the application forms. 3. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed with a direction to the respondents to do the needful in terms of the submissions as above. The needful shall be done within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment alongwith a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner. 4. The petition stands disposed of accordingly, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. December 13, 2010. ( Justice V.K. Ahuja), (tilak/pankaj) Judge.