Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35279 of 2018 Petitioner :- Sharad Pathak And Another Respondent :- Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- Prakash Padia
Hon'ble Govind Mathur,Acting Chief Justice Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.
Under an order dated 18.09.2018, the Chief Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Kanpur Divisional Office, Indian Oil Corporation considered and decided the representation submitted by the petitioners in relation to cancellation of their candidature for consideration for grant of retail outlet dealership advertised on 15.10.2014.
In brief, factual matrix of the case is that under the advertisement aforesaid, Indian Oil Corporation invited applications from the eligible candidates to be considered for allotment of retail outlet dealership at the location of Annupur Mod to Hamirpur Border situated on National Highway 86, District Kanpur Nagar. In response to the advertisement aforesaid, the petitioners submitted an application that was considered by the competent Authority. Ultimately, it was noticed that the petitioners submitted certain affidavits which were forged and, as such, their candidature was rejected. Being aggrieved by the same, they preferred a petition for writ, i.e., Writ-C No. 24936 of 2018 that came to be disposed of on 25.07.2018 with a direction to the competent Authority to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioners ventilating their grievance in accordance with law. In compliance of the direction given, the Authority competent has considered and decided the representation submitted by the petitioners on 18.09.2018. The competent Authority noticed that Committee while considering candidature of the petitioners investigated the entire matter and found that no objection certificates submitted by five co-sharers namely Sri Udai Pal Singh, Sri Abdul Hameed, Sri Munna Khan, Sri Faheem and Sri Ram Narain Kushwaha are forged. The Committee while arriving at the conclusion noticed that stamp papers on which affidavits were sworn in were issued on 19.04.2017 and 22.12.2016 whereas the same were notarified on 08.11.2014.
While questioning correctness of the order dated 18.09.2018, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners is that, as a matter of fact, there was no need to submit any kind of affidavits/no objection certificates by the petitioners to be considered for allotment of retail outlet at the location in question. According to learned counsel, in view of the fact aforesaid, the Committee considered and competent Authority ignored the no objection certificates submitted by the co-shares of the land proposed by the petitioners.
We do not find any merit in the arguments advanced. The petitioners knowing it well that certain no objection certificates are required to be given by the co-sharers of the land proposed submitted the same to the Indian Oil Corporation and, admittedly, those are drawn on the stamp papers which were issued subsequent to the date of their notarification. A person who is committing forgery is not at all entitled to have any relief in extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. The conduct of the petitioners dis-entitles them to have any punitive writ.
The writ petition is dismissed accordingly.
Order Date :- 26.10.2018 Shubham .
(Chandra Dhari Singh, J.) (Govind Mathur, A.C.J.)