....<.....t.mmw.mm.wmmmwzmwa year; that the respondents Z and 2 kept on assuring the
petitioner that he would be appointed as a reguia”r~:’d«e:aier
to run the said petroleum bunk at the’
designated place; new policy/gu:idei’ines*’..weVr_eV’iissue~d i
the 15′ respondent-Union of IndiaQyie_rriding_~v_’a’il~ pre’yi’eu’s–..g
guidelines, thereby notifying the dea’l”e.rish’Vi’p:sVVyvill be V
given only to the holding
pending letter of ‘AitIpV:’..a*’ppoint dealers
under normal; advertisement.
Petitioner piipllilcy guidelines dated
betore this Court by filing
the writ pet_it’ien’vs:hi’eh be ultimately withdrawn
by the;p’etitione’;s, Ztith May 2007, reserving liberty to
by filing fresh writ petition. When
the~.fa–ctsV”‘stppd’.:ithus, an advertisement is published in
V the ideal.’ daily news paper by the 2″” respondent
2::’i,_6.i2f0Q9 aide Annexdre~’M’ inviting suitabie
.A”4″”~i____’canAdidates from Scheduled Caste category to be
E 2*:
Eyes
_ \x«\x«\\\§«..t
-§7_
!’
it
assured or promised the petitiovr.e»r»..thaij””he”rvvoi§ild_:’A.be.i
given the dealership,
The material on record produeged’lib-yutnve petitioner
will not help the petitio:n’e.r respondents
2 and 3 have promised to provide
dealership muchielss Even the
documents are not helpful to the
case of then’ they do not reveal
that the:”‘._ret_aii given in favour of the
petitioner atvany po_int_ oftime even temporarily. Merely
_.v..becavuste’vvt’he banlanl< guarantee for maintenance of the retail
if go't:it'l'etj'.i.–h view of the fact that the outlet would be having
"'«'.tp_etroi and petroleum products worth lakhs of rupees and '
it/5
M2}-
the back door method pf helping spmeone, it
advertise lnvéting applications to find 0u.t__l;h:;evi§uxiltalji*e
person for a particular category te rur’_l:§§e«_[reta§.l’: ‘e;:.ul:,_l”e’tV,A[_T’:’
In View of the above, {he-.petiti’Cne1′.je;’._:n’t:lf’emiltled”V
to any of the reliefs, vPe_titiQrl”‘fale_li=’land aeciordlvrijgly, the
same stands dismissedf ‘
Eeix’ *
333$?