Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 93 (TS)

Vamshikrishna Indarapu v. Govt. of India

2024-02-19

SUREPALLI NANDA

body2024
ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents. 2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under: “to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in cancellation of the Retail Outlet(RO) Dealership vide Advertisement dated 28.06.2023 for the location in Bittupally Village, Manthani Mandal, Peddapalli Revenue District, Telangana State., which was allotted in favour of the petitioner based on DRAW OF LOTS held on 26.12.2023, without giving any notice or opportunity to be heard and subsequently re-notifying to conduct the selection process through DRAW OF LOTS for selection of the Retail Outlet(RO) Dealership which is to be held on 21.02.2024, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently seta aside the refortification/correspondence issued to the other applicants to attend the draw of lots for selection of Retail Outlet(RO) dealership to be held on 21.02.2024 and thereafter direct the respondents more particularly respondent No.3, to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 01.02.2024 and reconfirm the selection of Retail Outlet(RO) Dealership which was already knocked in favour of the petitioner based on the DRAW OF LOTS held on 26.12.2023, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” PERUSED THE RECORD. 3. It is the specific case of the petitioner that in response to an advertisement pertaining to appointment of Retail outlet dealerships in the State of Telangana by BPCL published on 28.06.2023, petitioner applied and got through the draw which took place on 26.12.2023 and petitioner received an official mail on 27.12.2023. In response to a second mail calling upon the petitioner to pay initial security deposit of Rs.20,000/- the petitioner paid the said amount towards security deposit and uploaded the required necessary documents as well on 06.01.2024. It is further the case of the petitioner that petitioner also received a mail saying that field verification of credentials (FVC) was done properly on 25.01.2024, but however, on 27.01.2024 petitioner received a call informing the petitioner, that petitioner’s application got rejected due to mismatch of PAN Card details. It is specifically contended by the petitioner, that a human error occurred due to server problem and that petitioner should be provided with a chance and petitioner’s application should be accepted. It is specifically contended by the petitioner, that a human error occurred due to server problem and that petitioner should be provided with a chance and petitioner’s application should be accepted. 4. The specific relief as sought for by the petitioner in the present Writ petition is to direct the Respondent No.3 to consider petitioner’s representation dated 01.02.2024 addressed to the 3rd respondent i.e. The Territory Coordinator(Retail) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Arya Nagar, Hyderabad Road, Nizamabad wherein the petitioner requested the 3rd respondent to re-accept the petitioner’s application of BPCL Retail Outlet Dealership in the State of Telangana as on 28.06.2023 duly considering the fact that an error occurred due to server problem. 5. It is the further case of the petitioner that, though the 3rd respondent received petitioner’s representation dated 01.02.2024 to accept petitioner’s application of BPCL Retail Outlet Dealership in the State of Telangana as on 28.06.2023, the 3rd respondent has not considered the same till as on date. 6. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondents represents that the Writ Petition could be disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation, dated 01.02.2024, in accordance to law, and pass appropriate orders, within a reasonable period. 7. Taking into consideration the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent, the Writ petition is disposed of directing Respondent No.3 to consider the petitioner’s Representation, dated 01.02.2024 addressed to the 3rd respondent before DRAW OF LOTS for selection of Retail Outlet(RO) Dealership scheduled to be held on 21.02.20204 is proceeded with by the 3rd respondent Authority, in accordance to law and pass appropriate orders, duly communicating the decision to the petitioner However, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall also stand closed.