JUDGMENT 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to quash the impugned letter dated 24.11.2019 whereby the candidature of the petitioner was cancelled and also the advertisement dated 19.1.2020 calling for application for appointment of retail outlet in respect of the location Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category. The petitioner also sought direction on the respondents to award retail outlet (petrol pump) dealership to her at the location within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category. 2. The case of the petitioner is that pursuant to the advertisement dated 25.11.2018 inviting applications for appointment of 59 retail outlet dealers at various locations in the State of Manipur, the petitioner submitted an application along with necessary application fee on 20.12.2018 in the OBC category for awarding retail outlet dealership located at Within 3 KM from Sainik School, Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar on Imphal-Pangei Road, District Imphal East. According to the petitioner, the mode of selection is by draw of lots and lot was held on 20.02.2019 and the petitioner was selected. The second respondent informed the petitioner that based on draw of lots for selection, she is declared as selected and requested the petitioner to remit online Rs.40,000/- towards initial security deposit and also to submit necessary documents along with OBC certificate. The petitioner had also paid the amount of Rs.40,000/- and submitted necessary documents. After receiving the aforesaid documents, the BPCL's Land Evaluation Committee visited the site and also verified the area of the land by taking measurement and informed the petitioner about the suitability of the land for location of the retail outlet dealership. 3. Further case of the petitioner is that the original OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 was lost on the way in between Koirengei and Mantripukhri, for which she has lodged a complaint before the Heingang Police Station to trace out the lost original OBC certificate. The petitioner also informed the second respondent about the loss of her original OBC certificate and also the complaint made in that regard. Since the original OBC certificate was lost, the petitioner could not produce her original OBC certificate at the time of field verification made by the officers of BPCL. The petitioner also informed the second respondent about the loss of her original OBC certificate and also the complaint made in that regard. Since the original OBC certificate was lost, the petitioner could not produce her original OBC certificate at the time of field verification made by the officers of BPCL. However, the petitioner has produced her original OBC certificate issued earlier to show the factum that she is an OBC certificate and she does not belongs to the Creamy Layer category. But the officers of BPCL insisted the petitioner to produce the original OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 as a copy of the said certificate was submitted by the petitioner earlier. Thereafter, the second respondent wrote a letter informing the petitioner that her candidature stands cancelled, as she was not in possession of the caste certificate on the date of application as declared in the application. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 4. The respondents 1 and 2 filed affidavit-in-opposition stating that the petitioner in her letter dated 22.11.2019 admitted that her OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 was misplaced and in the contrary, in her application dated 20.12.2018, she misrepresented to the respondents that she was in possession of the certificate even before it was issued. This particular aspect leaves no doubt that the petition claiming for her cause is unfounded and untrue. When the officials of BPCL made field visit, the petitioner was not in a possession of the caste certificate on the date of application and, accordingly, her candidature stood cancelled. Therefore, the petitioner has no right to challenge the cancellation letter and, thus prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Assailing the impugned letter and the advertisement for appointment of retail outlet dealership of Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category, Mr. Th. Mahira, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the original OBC certificate was lost, the petitioner could not produce the same at the time of the field verification of credential made by the officers of the BPCL. However, the petitioner has produced her original OBC certificate issued earlier to show the factum that she is an OBC candidate, but the officers insisted the original OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 as the copy of the said certificate was submitted by the petitioner earlier. However, the petitioner has produced her original OBC certificate issued earlier to show the factum that she is an OBC candidate, but the officers insisted the original OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 as the copy of the said certificate was submitted by the petitioner earlier. Due to non-submission of the OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018, the second respondent cancelled the candidature of the petitioner, which is arbitrary. 6. Mr. Th. Mahira, the learned counsel further submitted that after the receipt of the impugned letter, the petitioner had submitted a representation on 25.11.2019 to the second respondent requesting to review the cancellation order dated 24.11.2019 as she belongs to OBC category. Without considering the said representation, the second respondent issued fresh advertisement calling for application for the retail outlet Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category. The act of the second respondent is highly condemnable. Thus, a prayer is made to set aside the impugned letter and the advertisement dated 19.1.2020 and to direct the respondent authorities to award dealership to the petitioner in respect of the retail outlet Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category. 7. Per contra, Mr. Boboy Potsangbam, the learned CGSC for the respondents submitted that the petitioner was not in possession of the OBC certificate which was filed on the date of application. He would submit that the date of application of the petitioner is on 20.12.2018 and the OBC certificate alleged to be lost is dated 22.12.2018, which will prove that on 20.12.2018, the petitioner is not having valid OBC certificate. The claim of the petitioner stood cancelled because of her own action and fault cannot be attributed on the respondents. Thus, a prayer is made to dismiss the writ petition. 8. This Court considered the rival submissions and also perused the materials available on record. 9. There is no dispute that the BPCL issued an advertisement on 25.11.2018 inviting applications for appointment of 59 retail outlet dealers at various locations in the State of Manipur and the petitioner has submitted her application on 20.12.2018 in the OBC category for awarding dealership located at Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category. There is no dispute that the BPCL issued an advertisement on 25.11.2018 inviting applications for appointment of 59 retail outlet dealers at various locations in the State of Manipur and the petitioner has submitted her application on 20.12.2018 in the OBC category for awarding dealership located at Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category. There is also no dispute that the petitioner was declared as selected and she had remitted Rs.40,000/- towards initial security deposit and also submitted necessary documents along with OBC certificate. 10. According to the respondents, when the officials of the BPCL made field verification, the petitioner has failed to produce the original OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018. Thus, on the date of submitting application on 20.12.2018, the petitioner is not having the OBC certificate. Therefore, the candidature of the petitioner was rightly cancelled. 11. It appears that after issuance of the impugned letter dated 24.11.2019, the petitioner has submitted a representation to the second respondent on 25.11.2019. The contents of the representation dated 25.11.2019 reads thus: 'I am in receipt of your E-mail dated 24/11/2019 wherein my candidate for the aforesaid location has been cancelled on the ground that the during Field Verification of Credentials I failed to produce the original document of the caste certificate on the date of application as declared in the application. The contents of the representation dated 25.11.2019 reads thus: 'I am in receipt of your E-mail dated 24/11/2019 wherein my candidate for the aforesaid location has been cancelled on the ground that the during Field Verification of Credentials I failed to produce the original document of the caste certificate on the date of application as declared in the application. I am to state that, I had applied for the aforesaid location reserved for OBC category against the original OBC certificate issued by the concerned authority on 20/11/2014 but the same was untraceable till I found it recently, during the period the aforesaid original certificate remained untraceable I applied for a duplicate copy of the OBC certificate and obtained a duplicate copy of the same on 22/12/2018 which was produced by me and accepted by the concerned official at the time of submission of the documents after the declaration of the result of the draw of lots for the said location but the same was also lost for which I had lodged a complaint with the concerned authority of the Police for which the concerned Officer in Charge of the Police Station have issued dated a certificate 23/04/2019 certifying the same and as such I could not produce neither the Original OBC certificate dated 20/11/2014 nor the duplicate copy of the OBC Certificate dated 22/12/2018 on the date of the FVC which was conducted on 22/11/2019. I am to submit that I belong to the OBC category as will be shown by the OBC certificate dated 20/11/2014 and my declaration on oath before the Oath Commissioner dated 19/12/2018 and same cannot be denied by any authority including the BPCL further I am ready and willing to produce the aforesaid OBC certificate dated 20/11/2014 whenever directed to do so and as such I am to request you to review the order dated 24.11.2019 cancelling my candidature for award of RO dealership at Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category for the ends of justice.' 12. From the representation of the petitioner dated 25.11.2019, it is clear that the OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 referred by the petitioner while applying is copy of the OBC certificate dated 20.11.2014 issued to her. 13. From the representation of the petitioner dated 25.11.2019, it is clear that the OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 referred by the petitioner while applying is copy of the OBC certificate dated 20.11.2014 issued to her. 13. On a perusal of the OBC certificates annexed to the writ petition, this Court finds that the OBC certificate dated 20/11/2014 is the original, which was issued by the Additional District Magistrate, Imphal Porompat, East District, Manipur. The certificate dated 22.12.2018 is the copy which was issued by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner/ADM, Imphal East and the Sub-Divisional Officer/SDM, Porompat, Imphal East after putting counter-sign. 14. According to the petitioner, since the certificate dated 20.11.2014 was lost, she obtained the OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 which was only produced at the time of applying the application. Since the said certificate dated 22.12.2018 was lost, she obtained copy of the same on 28.11.2019. On 30.11.2019, during field inspection when the petitioner was not able to produce the OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018, her candidature was cancelled. 15. In order to appreciate the case of the petitioner, the following dates and events are necessary: Dates Events 25.11.2018 : Advertisement inviting applications 20.12.2018 : Online application submitted by the petitioner 09.02.2019 : Second respondent declared the petitioner as qualified for draw of lots for selection of the retail outlet dealership 20.02.2019 : Draw of lots held and declared the petitioner was successful candidate 24.02.2019 : Request of the second respondent to remit online Rs.40,000/- towards initial security deposit 26.02.2019 : Initial Security Deposit of Rs.40,000/- paid 28.08.2019 : Letter addressed by the second respondent that the visit of land evaluation committee on 10.09.2019. 10.09.2019 : BPCL's Land Evaluation Committee visited the site offered by the petitioner. 19.11.2019 : Second respondent addressed a letter informing the petitioner that field verification of credential of the details given by the petitioner would be conducted on 30.11.2019. 30.11.2019 : The petitioner was informed that she had failed to produce the original documents for verification by the officers of the BPCL. 16. From the above dates and events, it is clear that as on the date of application i.e. on 20.12.2018, the petitioner was possessing the OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018, which was the copy of the original OBC certificate issued on 20.11.2014 issued to her. 16. From the above dates and events, it is clear that as on the date of application i.e. on 20.12.2018, the petitioner was possessing the OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018, which was the copy of the original OBC certificate issued on 20.11.2014 issued to her. According to the petitioner, the certificate dated 22.12.2018 was lost on the way in between Koirengei to Mantripukhri on 20.04.2019 i.e. in between the date of deposit of initial security deposit and the filed verification. Qua the loss of OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018, the petitioner lodged a complaint before the Heingang Police Station and the Officer-in-charge of the said Police Station has issued certificate dated 23.4.2019. The said certificate reads thus: 'This is to certify that one Thangjam Premavani Chanu D/O Th. Subol Meitei of Koirengei Thongkhong, Imphal East lodged a written report to OC HNG-PS stating that her original OBC Certificate bearing Sl.No.2773/OBC/ SDO/P/2018 issued by Deputy Commissioner Imphal East was lost on the way in between Koirengei to Mantripukhri on 20th April, 2019 and untraced till date despite of his best efforts to trace out the same. In this regards, an inquiry has been made into the matter by this police station vide G.D. entry No.32/HNG-PS/2019 of dated 23rd April, 2019 and found genuine and the same is not trace till date. She is not related to me.' 17. It appears that at the time of field verification on 30.11.2019, the petitioner informed the officials of BPCL about the loss of the OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 and lodging of the complaint. It also appears that the loss of OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 was informed by the petitioner to the second respondent two days before the field verification by way of letter dated 22.12.2018. The aforesaid facts would reveal that the plea of the respondent authorities that on the date of application i.e. on 20.12.2018, the petitioner misrepresented that she was in possession of the OBC certificate is incorrect. On the other hand, the petitioner has established that on the date of application she was in possession of the OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 which was subsequently lost on 20.4.2019 for which a police complaint was lodged and the police concerned stated that the same is not traced out till the date of issuance of the certificate dated 23.4.2019. 18. On the other hand, the petitioner has established that on the date of application she was in possession of the OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018 which was subsequently lost on 20.4.2019 for which a police complaint was lodged and the police concerned stated that the same is not traced out till the date of issuance of the certificate dated 23.4.2019. 18. The reason for cancelling the candidature of the petitioner is on the ground that the petitioner was not in possession of the caste certificate on the date of application as declared in the application. The aforesaid reason is unfounded and the second respondent ought not to have taken such decision. In fact, the officials of BPCL ought to have given an opportunity or chance to the petitioner to produce the copy of the caste certificate duly obtained from the authority concerned. In the case on hand, the officials of BPCL failed to give such opportunity to the petitioner and erred in informing the petitioner that during field verification the petitioner failed to produce the original documents for verification. Thus, the impugned letter dated 24.11.2019 holding that the petitioner was not in possession of the caste certificate on the date of application is erroneous. 19. Admittedly, after issuance of the impugned order dated 24.11.2019, the petitioner has submitted a representation on 25.11.2019 and the same has not been considered till date. However, the respondent BPCL issued an advertisement dated 19.01.2020 inviting online applications for appointment of retail outlet dealership at different locations, including the location at Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category. 20. It appears that by the interim order dated 22.01.2020, this Court directed that the advertisement dated 19.01.2020 in respect of the location at Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category shall remain suspended till the next date. By the order dated 07.02.2020, the said interim was extended until further orders. Thus, as on date, the interim order in respect of the retail outlet located at Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category is operating. 21. By the order dated 07.02.2020, the said interim was extended until further orders. Thus, as on date, the interim order in respect of the retail outlet located at Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category is operating. 21. For the foregoing discussions, this Court is of the view that the impugned letter dated 24.11.2019 cancelling the candidature of the petitioner at the location Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category and the fresh advertisement dated 19.1.2020 in respect of the location at Within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category are liable to the set aside. 22. In fine, (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned letter dated 24.11.2019 and the fresh advertisement dated 19.1.2020 in respect of the retail outlet located within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category stand quashed. (iii) The respondent authorities are directed to consider to award the retail outlet (petrol pump) dealership at the location within 3 KM from Sainik School Imphal towards Lamlong Bazaar under OBC category to the petitioner. (iv) The petitioner is directed to produce a copy of the OBC certificate dated 28.11.2019 said to have been obtained after passing of the impugned order within ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the respondent authorities for awarding dealership on the undertaking that she will produce the OBC certificate dated 22.12.2018, which was referred to by the petitioner while submitting the application dated 20.12.2018, as and when traced out. (v) Upon receipt of the copy of the OBC certificate, the respondent authorities are directed to complete the exercise within a period of four weeks thereafter. (vi) No costs.