Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Telangana
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Puli Venkata Nagarjuna vs Executive Director

High Court Of Telangana|18 November, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.34157 of 2014 Dated : 18.11.2014 Between:
Puli Venkata Nagarjuna S/o.Venkateswarlu, Aged 26 yrs, Occu : Business, R/o.H.No.6-49A, Papaipalem Village, Vetapalem Mandal, Prakasam District .. Petitioner And Executive Director, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, No.3-6436 to 438 II & IIIrd Floor, Naspur House, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad-500 029 & another .. Respondents This Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.34157 of 2014 ORDER :
On 15.09.2013 a notification was issued by the respondent-Oil Corporation and two other Oil Corporations, calling for applications for enlistment of LPG Distributors through out the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh. One of the locations notified was Chirala Town and Mandal, Prakasam District, in Serial No.440. The petitioner has applied for awarding of dealership in the said location.
2. As per the notification and the brochure governing the selection, it is mandatory for a person applying for dealership to maintain Rs.15 Lakhs Bank balance as on the date of application, if the location is in Urban area, and Rs.10 Lakhs in case of Urban-Rural & Rural areas. Column No.11 and 12 of the notification mandate that the applicant should show minimum bank balance as required, in his own account or in a joint account of family members. The applicant can also support the investments made in Bonds, NSC’s, fixed deposit, terms deposit, PPF, Post Office, shares of listed companies, Government Organisations, Public Sector Undertaking of State and Central Government in support of minimum required funds. In both cases, if it is a joint account of the family member a declaration in Appendix-2 from such family member is necessary.
3. The outlet at Chirala is classified as Urban-Rural area and therefore, the petitioner has to fulfil the requirement of minimum bank balance of Rs.10 Lakhs as on the last date of the application. The petitioner has filed a notarised affidavit as required in Appendix –2. On verification of the bank balance in the petitioner’s Savings Bank account, by letter dated 11.10.2014 the petitioner was informed that his candidature is not eligible for awarding LPG distributorship as the amount prescribed was insufficient. Aggrieved thereby, this writ petition is instituted.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that in accordance with Column No.11 and 12 of the notification, a declaration is filed in Appendix-2 and in view of the declaration given by the family member of the petitioner, the requirements of Column No.11 and 12 in the notification are satisfied and therefore, insistence of minimum bank balance of Rs.10 Lakhs was erroneous. As per the advertisement Rs.2,50,000.00 was sufficient and the same was already furnished along with the application.
5. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that minimum requirement as per the advertisement read with Brochure is Rs.10 Lakhs in the location of Urban-Rural area and as per the requirement of the notification and brochure governing the selections, a person has to show minimum balance and as the minimum balance is not shown, the application of the petitioner was rejected and, therefore, there is no error in rejection and it is in accordance with the selection procedure, as envisaged in Para 6 of the brochure on guidelines for selection of regular LPG distributors of August, 2013.
6. To appreciate rival contentions it is necessary to consider Clause 6 (vi) of the Guidelines for selection. It reads as under :
“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 Bank, 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).
7. According to the above clause, the minimum balance required to be shown is Rs.10 lakhs. The columns 11 and 12 of the notification read with clause 6(vi) of the guidelines give flexibility to the applicants. To fulfil the requirement of minimum balance, it enables the applicant to furnish combined savings bank account or security deposit, Certificate of investments made in various institutions as mentioned therein or one or more of them to cover up any deficiency in the minimum balance available with the applicant. However, only the joint account of the family member or joint investment with the family member alone is accepted. An investment made/ joint account maintained with any other person outside the family is not considered for this purpose. Even in case of joint investment/ joint account with family member, it mandates obtaining declaration from the co-account holder or co-investor in Appendix-2.
8. Great emphasis is made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on Clause 3 of the declaration in Appendix-2. Minimum Rs.Ten lakhs is insisted by the respondent corporation from an applicant, as that would be the required amount to establish godown and office to run the dealership. The Corporation expects the applicant to have the means by the time he applies, so that there would be no hindrance to commence the dealership. Clause 3 in Appendix-2 has to be understood in the context of providing relaxation of condition to have minimum balance. While enabling the applicant to take support from the family member to augment the resources, a notarised affidavit from the joint account holder/ joint investor is insisted to ensure that such declaration is made by the applicant with the consent of joint account holder/ joint investor and that he would stand by the declaration given by the applicant showing the minimum balance as required by the brochure, in case the applicant is allotted the distributorship for utilisation of the said amount, for the purpose of establishment of distributorship. This safeguard is only to ensure that if the selections are finalised, the co-account holder or the co-investor would not say that he was not consulted and therefore, he would not agree for the utilisation of the joint funds for the purpose of establishment of retail outlet. Such an affidavit was obtained by the petitioner. However, as verified by the respondent-Corporation, the balance in the concerned account which was furnished by the petitioner was falling short of required bank balance as per the notification and the brochure even after taking into consideration the joint account amount. Thus, the applicant did not satisfy the mandatory eligibility to consider his application for awarding dealership.
9. Having regard to the same, I do not see any error in rejection of the application submitted by the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending in this writ petition, if any, shall stand dismissed.
P.NAVEEN RAO,J 18th November, 2014 Rds THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.34157 of 2014 Dated : 18.11.2014
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Puli Venkata Nagarjuna vs Executive Director

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
18 November, 2014
Judges
  • P Naveen Rao