IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.14033 of 2010
AJAY KUMAR SINGH
Versus
THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS
-----------
2. 27.8.2010 I.A. No.7595/2010
The interlocutory application has been
filed for adding the intervener as respondent to
the writ petition.
It is submitted by Mr. Jitendra Prasad
Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the intervener
that he was the second candidate in the earlier
interview and thus he would be directly affected
by any decision in the present writ petition.
The aforesaid fact stated in the
interlocutory application is not denied by any of
the parties.
In the above circumstances, the prayer for
intervention is allowed and the applicant,
Satyendra Narain Singh alias Satyendra Singh, is
directed to be added as respondent No.6 to the
writ application.
I.A. No.7595 of 2010 is, accordingly,
disposed of.
The petitioner seeks quashing of the order
dated 17.2.2010 passed by the Director
(Marketing), Ministry of Petroleum and Natural
-2-
Gas, Government of India, by which the
recommendation of the Committee of Petitions of
Parliament has not been accepted by the Ministry
and seeks further a direction for issuance of
letter of intent in his favour with respect to
SKO-LDO, Dealership at Jalalpur in the District of
Saran and for other consequential reliefs by
filing I.A. No.7544 of 2010. The petitioner
further seeks ad-interim stay of letter dated
9.8.2010, by which the interview for SKO/LDO
Dealership for Jalalpur is going to be held on
30.8.2010.
The case has a chequered history. The
petitioner was earlier selected at serial No.1 in
the year 1998 but on L.O.I not being issued in his
favour, he approached the Committee of Petitions
of Parliament which recommended the issuance of
L.O.I to him. Ultimately, the petitioner
approached this Court by filing C.W.J.C.
No.11447/2006 and the same was allowed by a
learned single Judge by order dated 19.8.2008 but
in L.P.A. No.745/2008 filed by the respondent
Indian Oil Corporation by order dated 21.1.2010,
the said order of the learned single Judge was set
aside and a direction was issued to the second
-3-
respondent Union of India to take a decision on
the recommendation of the Parliamentary Petition
Committee within a period of three weeks and
intimate the Corporation. The decision of the
Central Government went against the petitioner
against which the petitioner has filed the present
writ application.
On a consideration of the letter dated
9.8.2010, it is evident that the petitioner has
also been invited for appearing before the
Selection Board on 30.8.2010.
In the aforesaid view of the matter, let
the respondents file their counter affidavits
within a period of four weeks from today.
Put up among zero cases in the main list
on 24.9.2010.
Any decision taken by the respondents
shall be subject to the result of the writ
petition.
VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J. )