JUDGMENT V.K.Shukla, J Smt. Amrita Arya, petitioner is before us questioning the validity of the orders dated 27.08.2015 and 23.09.2015 passed by Chief Area Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Civil Lines, Allahabad, respondent no. 2 by which the candidature of the petitioner for awarding of LPG Distributorship at Civil Lines Allahabad, District Allahabad under SC category pursuant to the advertisement dated 29.09.2013 published in Hindi Daily News Paper "Dainik Jagran" has been rejected on the premises that petitioner does not fulfil the condition mentioned in para 6.1 (VI) of brouchure namely "Guidelines for Selection of Regular LPG Distributor". An advertisement was published in the daily news paper namely 'Dainik Jagran' Allahabad edition on 29.09.2013 inviting application from eligible persons for appointment of LPG Distributors at different places/locations in the State of U.P. under general, S.C./S.T., O.B.C. and etc. category for Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. And Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Petitioner claims that pursuant to advertisement in question, she also applied and as per the terms and conditions of the advertisement, she gave full details of her financial status as was required under general instructions; (i) amount in saving back account (ii) Fixed Deposit/NSC/Shares/MF etc. Said details are as follows: 11. AMOUNT IN SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT in Scheduled Bank/Post Office in the name of applicant and members(s) of 'Family Unit' has to be submitted. S.N. Name of Bank S.B A/C No. Name of Account holders(s) Relation with applicant Amount 1 State Bank of India 10209627930 Amrita Arya Self Rs. 54683-0 2 State Bank of India 30054430563 Amrita Arya Self Rs. 1720-00 Total 56403-00 Total amount in words Fifty Six Thousand Four Hundred Three only 12. FIXED DEPOSITE/NSC/SHARES/MF ETC in the name of applicant and members(s) of 'family unit'. Attach affidavit as per format given in Appendix-2 from member(s) of family unit. S. N. Name of Bank S.B A/C No. Date Name of Account holders(s) Relation with applicant Initial investment Amount Amount 1 FDR 10209684398 Dt. 6.8.2004 Amrita Arya & Diksha Arya Sister 100,000.00 Rs. 179234 – 00 2 FDR 10209684397 Dt.06.08.2004 “ Sister 100,000.00 Rs. 178598-00 3 FDR 32421247579 Dt. 11.7.2012 Amrita Arya Self 75,000.00 Rs. 83590 – 00 4 FDR 32941726285 Dt.15.04.2013 Amrita Arya Self 200,000.00 208750 – 00 5 FDR 32937662850 Dt.12.04.2013 Amrita Arya Self 20,000.00 20875 – 00 6. LIC 314014139 Dt.30.01.2010 Amrita Arya Self 43,000.00 44741 – 00 Total Rs. 179234 – 00 2 FDR 10209684397 Dt.06.08.2004 “ Sister 100,000.00 Rs. 178598-00 3 FDR 32421247579 Dt. 11.7.2012 Amrita Arya Self 75,000.00 Rs. 83590 – 00 4 FDR 32941726285 Dt.15.04.2013 Amrita Arya Self 200,000.00 208750 – 00 5 FDR 32937662850 Dt.12.04.2013 Amrita Arya Self 20,000.00 20875 – 00 6. LIC 314014139 Dt.30.01.2010 Amrita Arya Self 43,000.00 44741 – 00 Total Rs. 715788 – 00 Total amount in word: Seven Lacs Fifteen Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty Eight Only 4. Petitioner as she was fulfilling all the requirement as has been mentioned in the advertisement dated 29.09.2013 issued by the Indian Oil Corporation, accordingly petitioner's name was kept within the zone of consideration and thereafter petitioner's name was eventually finalized in lottery draw for appointment as LPG Distributor for Location 359 Civil Lines Allahabad under SC category. Officers of Indian Oil Corporation directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 50,000/- through demand draft for verification. The petitioner in her turn deposited Rs. 50,000/- with the respondents and thereafter Field Verification Committee (FVC) of IOC verified the Godown and showroom. Petitioner submits that after all the requisite exercise has been undertaken her candidature in question has been sought to be rejected by the Chief Area Manager, Indian Oil Corporation, Allahabad by placing reliance on Para 6.1 (VI) of Brochure on Guidelines for Selection of Regular LPG Distributors, August 2013 on 27.8.2013. Petitioner submits that she represented against the same as opinion formed was totally unjustifiable. Petitioner has stated that her point of view has not at all been adverted to and by means of letter sent to her on 23.09.2015 she has been once again informed that amount maintained in the joint account with member(s) outside the "Family Unit" will not be considered, accordingly, Fixed Deposit in joint account has not been recognized, as such her candidature has rightly been rejected in the past. At this juncture, present writ petition in question has been filed. 5. On the basis of pleadings that are on record, with the consent of the parties, present writ petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal. 6. At this juncture, present writ petition in question has been filed. 5. On the basis of pleadings that are on record, with the consent of the parties, present writ petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal. 6. Sri N.K.Pandey, Advocate appearing for petitioner submitted that in the present case totally unreasonable opinion has been formed by the officer of Indian Oil Corporation, Allahabad based on fiction far away from truth at the point of time when they have proceeded to consider FDR detail furnished by the petitioner and have proceeded to ignore the same on the presumption that said FDRs ar in the joint account, alongwith a member outside the "Family Unit" whereas in the facts of the case, said FDR's has to be accepted to be in the joint account alongwith member of "Family Unit" failing which it would be clear cut that case of discrimination based on marital status. 7. Countering the said submission Sri J.S. Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Tarun Verma, Advocate submitted that the FDRs in question by no stretch of imagination could have been considered as per the policy decision that has been holding the field and rightful opinion has been formed at the point of time when candidature of petitioner has been rejected and accordingly, action taken is strictly in consonance with the policy decision, as such no interference should be made by this Court. 8. Before proceeding to answer the issue that has been so raised, we would examine the guidelines that has been fixed by the IOC for Selection of Regular LPG Distributor, from August 2013 onwards and as per the said guidelines in question locations for setting up of LPG Distributorship are identified based on available refill sale potential, which can sustain economically viable operation of an LPG distributorship. The refill sale potential is based on several factors including population, population growth rate, economic prosperity of the location and the distance from the existing nearest distributor. 9. The setting up of LPG distributorships at the identified locations is to be undertaken as per the guidelines containing mode of selection; eligibility criteria for individual applicants wherein all the applicants fulfilling the eligibility criteria will become eligible for the draw for selection of the LPG distributorship. 9. The setting up of LPG distributorships at the identified locations is to be undertaken as per the guidelines containing mode of selection; eligibility criteria for individual applicants wherein all the applicants fulfilling the eligibility criteria will become eligible for the draw for selection of the LPG distributorship. Common eligibility criteria for all category applying as individual relevant for the purposes of answering issues raised in the present case are as follows: "6.1. Common Eligibility Criteria for all Categories applying as Individual v. Fulfil Multiple dealership/distributorship norm as under: - Multiple Dealership/Distributorship norms means that the applicant or any other member of ''family unit' should not hold a dealership/ distributorship/ RGGLV or Letter of Intent (LOI) for a dealership/distributorship/RGGLV of a PSU Oil Company i.e. only one Retail Outlet / SKO-LDO dealership / LPG distributorship/RGGLV of PSU Oil Company will be allowed to a ''Family Unit'. However, existing SKO dealers of OMCs operating below an average allocation of 75 KL of SKO per month during the immediate preceding 12 months prior to the month of advertisement will be eligible to apply under the category of individual applicant only and if selected will have to surrender their Kerosene dealership prior to issuance of letter of appointment for LPG Distributorship. The SKO dealer applying for Regular LPG Distributorship will have to submit documentary proof of Kerosene allocation issued by the allocating authority of the State Govt./Divisional/Territory/Regional Office of the Oil Marketing Company, as the case may be. The aforementioned Multiple Dealership/Distributorship norms shall also be applicable to retailers/distributors appointed by PSU Oil Marketing Companies for exclusive marketing of NDNE (Non Domestic Non Essential) LPG cylinders. ''Family Unit' in case of married person/ applicant, shall consist of individual concerned, his/her Spouse and their unmarried son(s)/daughter(s). In case of unmarried person/ applicant, ''Family Unit' shall consist of individual concerned, his/her parents and his/her unmarried brother(s) and unmarried sister(s). In case of divorcee, ''Family Unit' shall consist of individual concerned, unmarried son(s)/unmarried daughter(s) whose custody is given to him/her. In case of widow/widower, ''Family Unit' shall consist of individual concerned, unmarried son(s)/unmarried daughter(s). vi. Have minimum total amount of Rs. 15 lakhs for Urban Markets and Rs. 10 lakhs for Urban-Rural & Rural Markets respectively as the closing balance on the last date for submission of application as specified in the advertisement or corrigendum (if any). In case of widow/widower, ''Family Unit' shall consist of individual concerned, unmarried son(s)/unmarried daughter(s). vi. Have minimum total amount of Rs. 15 lakhs for Urban Markets and Rs. 10 lakhs for Urban-Rural & Rural Markets respectively as the closing balance on the last date for submission of application as specified in the advertisement or corrigendum (if any). This amount is to be arrived at by adding amount in Savings Bank accounts in Scheduled Bank/ Post Office, free and un-encumbered Fixed Deposits in Scheduled Banks, Post Office, Listed Companies / Government Organisation / Public Sector Undertaking of State and Central Government, Kisan Vikas Patra, NSC, Bonds, Shares of Listed Companies, Listed Mutual Funds, ULIP, PPF, Surrender Value of Life Insurance policies in the name of Applicant or family members of the ''Family Unit' of the Applicant as defined above. In case of locations reserved under ''SC/ST' category, minimum total amount of Rs. 5 lakhs for Urban Markets and Rs. 2.5 lakhs for Urban-Rural & Rural Markets respectively should be available as the closing balance on the last date for submission of application as specified in the advertisement or corrigendum (if any)." 10. For locations reserved under 'SC/ST' category minimum total amount of 5.00 lacs for Urban Market has to be available as the closing balance on the last date for submission of application as specified in the advertisement or corrigendum (if any) Candidature of the petitioner has been non-suited as follows : 1. For point no.12 Sr. no. 1 & 2 of the application, you had mentioned the two fixed deposits in the joint ownership of you and your sister and value of these two fixed deposits as on date of application is worth Rs.357832/-. But as per policy your sister is not considered part of your "family unit" because you are married. Hence as per policy two said fixed deposits have not been considered. For point no.12 Sr. no.3 to 5 of the application, you had mentioned the 3 fixed Deposits in your name as well as in the name of your husband & value of these three fixed deposits as on the date of application is worth Rs.313215/-. But at the time of field verification, it is found that value as on last date of submission of application i.e. 28.10.13 of said 03 fixed deposits is Rs.313553/-. But at the time of field verification, it is found that value as on last date of submission of application i.e. 28.10.13 of said 03 fixed deposits is Rs.313553/-. Hence as per application total amount available with you as on last date of submission of application i.e. 28.10.13 is Rs.414697/-. Whereas as per policy, minimum requirement of funds on the last date of submission of application is Rs. 500000/- for SC category of Urban regular distributorship. The above deviation will affect the eligibility of applicant as per IMP guidelines. This has also been mentioned in para 6.1 (vi) of applicable brouchure on guidelines for selection of Regular LPG distributor Aug 2013 as: Have minimum total amount of 15 lakhs for Urban Markets and 10 lakhs for Urban-Rural & Rural Markets respectively as the closing balance on the last date for submission of application as specified in the advertisement or corrigendum (if any). This amount is to be arrived at by adding amount in Savings Bank Accounts in scheduled Bank/Post Office, free and un-encumbered Fixed Deposits in Scheduled Banks, Post Office, Listed Companies/Government Organization/Public Sector undertaking of State and Central Government, Kisan Vikas patra, NSC, Bonds, Shares of Listed Companies, Listed Mutual Funds, ULIP, PPF, Surrender Value of Life Insurance Policies in the name of Applicant or family members of the "Family Unit" of the Applicant as defined above. In case of locations reserved under "SC/ST" category, minimum total amount of 5 Laks for Urban Markets and 2.5 lakhs for urban-Rural & Rural Markets respectively should be available as the closing balance on the last date for submission of application as specified in the advertisement or corrigendum (if any) During the field verification you had given a letter to FVC committee mentioning that you had two LIC policies in the name of you and your spouse and surrender value of said LIC polices on last date of submission of application is Rs. 87600/- but same were not mentioned in the application form due to space constraint in application form. The said LIC policies have not been considered, as per policy due to same not being mentioned in application form by you. In view of the above, your candidature is rejected and the amount of Rs. 50000/- deposited with corporation stands forfeited in line with clause no. 10th & 10 i of the advertised. Division Bench of this Court, in Civil Misc. In view of the above, your candidature is rejected and the amount of Rs. 50000/- deposited with corporation stands forfeited in line with clause no. 10th & 10 i of the advertised. Division Bench of this Court, in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 21394 of 2013 (Meet Kalhar Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and another) faced with situation has favoured purposive interpretation as follows: "At the outset, we are constrained to note that the guidelines, while prescribing and requiring the applicant to hold in credit Rs.15 lacs, do not exclude the consideration of account held jointly. The account in question which stood in the name of the petitioner and his brother, in our opinion, therefore, did not run contrary to the provisions of Clause 7.1.v. We further find that even if the provisions of the guidelines were tested on the basic principles of purposive interpretation, the submissions made on behalf of the respondents deserve to be rejected. A perusal of the definition of 'Family Unit' as well as Clause 7.1.v when read together, shows and establishes that the minimum amount of Rs.15 lacs was to be held either in the name of the applicant or 'family members' of the 'family unit' of the applicant as defined above. If Sri Budhwar's arguments were to be accepted then if the account in question stood in the name of the petitioner together with parents, unmarried brother or unmarried sister, he would, in the light of Sri Budhwar's submission, be eligible for consideration. The provisions of the guidelines must be interpreted purposively and having regard to the underlying objective thereof. Applying the well known rules of interpretation, we are of the opinion that merely because the account also carried the name of the brother of the petitioner, the same did not disqualify the petitioner from consideration. Accordingly, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 23rd March, 2013 is quashed. As a necessary consequence, the Corporation is directed to consider the application of the petitioner not treating the same to be in violation of the provisions of Clause 7 of the guidelines for selection and to pass appropriate orders on the same within a period of 60 days from the date of production of a certified copy of this order of the Court. No order as to costs." 12. Petitioner submits that FDRs as detailed out at item no. No order as to costs." 12. Petitioner submits that FDRs as detailed out at item no. 12 has been in her name as well as in the name of Diksha Arya her sister and date of investment by way of FDRs admittedly is dated 06.08.2004 for a sum of Rs. One lac each and on the date of moving of application form valuation of said FDRs has been Rs 1,79234/- and 1,78,598/- respectively. Said FDRs admittedly have been made at the point of time when petitioner was unmarried alongwith her unmarried sister and this much is also clear that as per definition of "Family Unit" in case of married person, same shall consist of individual concerned his/her Spouse and their unmarried son(s)/daughter(s) and in case of unmarried person, "Family Unit" has to comprise his/her parents and his/her unmarried brother and unmarried sister. As a matter of policy amounts maintained in the joint account are permitted to be mentioned, provided same is with member(s) of "Family Unit". Both these FDRs have been ignored on account of the fact, that sister is not considered part of family unit as petitioner is married and amount maintained in the joint account with members outside the "Family Unit" should not have been mentioned and same was not at all liable to be considered. This part however is not disputed, that at the point of time when investment by way of FDRs has been made by petitioner alongwith her sister, sister who is unmarried formed part of the "Family Unit". As already mentioned above, minimum total amount of Rs.5 lacs for SC/ST category candidate has to be available as the closing balance on the last date for submission of application. Once object of policy is that Rs. 5 lac should be available at the closing balance on the last date of submission form, then FDRs maintained in joint account alongwith member of "Family Unit", prior to marriage can not be permitted to be ignored specially when joint account are permitted to be maintained with members of "Family Unit" after marriage. Such an interpretation, fulfills the object of policy and equally protects the interest of party, keeping in view the life style of the society in question i.e family formation failing which it would be clear cut case of discrimination based on martial status. Such an interpretation, fulfills the object of policy and equally protects the interest of party, keeping in view the life style of the society in question i.e family formation failing which it would be clear cut case of discrimination based on martial status. Such a view would balance the interest of Oil Company as well as protect the interest of lady who has made investment while being member of diverse family froms recognized under the policy. 13. Nobody doubts this fact that FDRs in question have been made at the point of time when Smt. Amrita Arya, petitioner was having status of an unmarried girl and in reference of said investment in question, this much is also accepted position, as per the Banks certificate, and as per the Banking norms, that petitioner is first account holder, alongwith her sister as second account holder, and first account holder is the beneficial owner of joint fixed deposit, with clause payable to either of survivor. Petitioner's sister Diksha has been categorical, that it was petitioner who has opened the account, with her name as second account holder, and even after marriage, renewal has been done by petitioner and her name continued as second account holder. Not only this income tax deductions are being made in consonance with the provision as contained under Article 194-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as taxes are also being deducted at source and interest of the said FDRs has been considered as income of petitioner. The Bank has clearly certified in its certificate dated 04.09.2015 that petitioner is beneficial owner of Fixed Deposits by virtue of being first account holder. 14. Once guidelines have been interpreted purposively having regard to the underlying objective thereof that incumbent should have Rs.5 lacs, in such a situation and in this background the FDRs in question that has been jointly held in the name of petitioner alongwith her unmarried sister as second account holder on the terms that it is payable to either or survivor, cannot be permitted to be ignored, and as per the Banking norms share of the petitioner could not have been ignored as fixed deposit in joint name of two persons is nothing but a joint account which, as the name suggests, is repayable on the agreed period. Apex Court in the case of Anumati vs. Punjab National Bank 2004 (8) SCC 898 has mentioned that difference between joint fixed deposit account and joint savings, current or other account, is that there is no right in depositors to operate such account and withdraw the money upon maturity. Fixed Deposit Receipt is an acknowledgement by the Bank that it holds a certain sum to the use of customer. The Bank is thus a debtor to the account holders in respect of amount deposited- a debt which is repayable by the Bank to the account holders with interest on the expiry of an agreed period. An "either or survivor" clause in such an account means that the amount payable by the Bank on maturity of fixed deposit may be paid to either of account holders by the Bank in order to obtain valid discharge and even if half of her share is taken of the said FDR petitioner on its face value fulfilled the criteria. 15. Once such is the factual situation in the present case, then to form opinion that on the last date of application petitioner was not having Rs.5 lacs available with her cannot be accepted by us. Amount mentioned in the joint account with members forming part of "Family Unit" has to be read and understood in the context of Banking norms holding the field at the time when investment has been made and in context to the definition of "Family Unit". 16. In view of above discussion, present writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Impugned orders dated 27.08.2015 and 23.09.2015 passed by Chief Area Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Civil Lines, Allahabad, respondent no. 2 are hereby quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to ensure fulfillment of the required formalities in accordance with law within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order of the Court.