IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1509 of 2011
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14619 of 2010
With
Interlocutory Application No. 7158 of 2011
In
Letters Patent Appeal No.1509 of 2011
======================================================
Smt. Manorma Devi W/o Shri Nageshwar Prasad Yadav Resident of
Mohalla Naglok Lallu Pokhar, P.S.-Kasim Bazar, District Munger.
.... .... Appellant
Versus
1. M/S Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, through its Chairman
and Mmanaging Director, having its Registered Office at 17, Jamshedji Tata
Road, Mumbai-400020.
2. The Dy. General Manager (North Central Zone), Hindustan Petroleum
Corporation Limited, Plot No. 1, Nehru enclave, Gomati Nagar, Lacknow,
Uttar Pradesh.
3. The Senior Regional Manager (Retain) Hindustan Petroleum Corporation
Limited, 6th Floor, Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Bhawan, Dak Bunglow Road,
Patna.
4. Smt. Sarita Sahu W/o Pappu Sao Resident of Mohalla-Chotti Keshopur,
P.S. Jamshedpur, District-Munger.
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mrs. Madhuri Lata, Advocate
For the Respondent No.3: Mr. Rabindra Nath Kanth, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
2 Patna High Court LPA No.1509 of 2011 (3) dt.20-10-2011
2/2
3. 20-10-2011 Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 28th June 2011
passed by the learned single Judge in above C.W.J.C. No. 14619
of 2010, the writ petitioner has preferred the present Appeal under
Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.
The subject matter of dispute is the award of a retail
dealership of petroleum products by the respondent M/s Hindustan
Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the
Corporation’) in the Telia Talab area in the town of Munger and
Nauagarhi More. The appellant-writ petitioner claims that the land
offered by her was in accordance with the advertisement and she
should have been allotted the dealership. The respondent
Corporation asserts that none of the applicants offered the land in
the above referred Telia Talab area. Thus, the location of the land
offered by the appellant is a disputed question; that cannot be
decided in a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Learned advocate Mr. Rabindra Nath Kanth has
appeared for the Corporation. He has submitted that pursuant to
the impugned direction the Corporation has re-advertised the
dealership in question.
In view of the aforesaid development also, the
Appeal is dismissed in limine.
We may note that the appellant may participate in the
fresh proceeding pursuant to the above referred advertisement
dated 22nd September 2011.
(R.M. Doshit, CJ)
(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)
Pawan/-