Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Jagwant Kaur, challenged the allotment of an LPG distributorship at Balachaur by the Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) to the 4th respondent. The allotment process began with an advertisement dated 19.01.2013, and the 4th respondent was selected by draw of lots on 18.12.2014. The appellant contended that the 4th respondent's land was also offered by another applicant, inviting disqualification, and that the 4th respondent later offered alternate land not possessed at the time of application. The High Court dismissed the writ petition and appeal. The Supreme Court examined the facts and found that the lessor owned a larger extent of land (52 kanals 4 marlas), out of which two separate parcels of equal extent (1 kanal 17 marlas each) were leased to the 4th respondent and another applicant. Revenue records confirmed distinct parcels and separate mutation entries. The Court held that no co-owner consent was required as the 4th respondent was the sole lessee of land solely owned by the lessor. The alternate land was offered only due to the lessor's contradictory affidavits, and its acceptance was permissible under the guidelines as interpreted in Mrinmoy Maity v. Chhanda Koley. The Court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Petroleum Laws - LPG Distributorship Allotment - Land Eligibility - Lease Deed - The appellant challenged the allotment of LPG distributorship to the 4th respondent on the ground that the same land was offered by another applicant. The Supreme Court held that the two lease deeds were for separate parcels of land owned by the same lessor, as confirmed by revenue records, and thus no disqualification arose. (Paras 2-11) B) Petroleum Laws - LPG Distributorship Allotment - Co-owner Consent - No Objection Certificate - The Court held that consent from co-owners is required only when the land is jointly owned or jointly leased. Since the 4th respondent was the sole lessee of a land owned solely by the lessor, no NOC was necessary. (Paras 6-9) C) Petroleum Laws - LPG Distributorship Allotment - Alternate Land - Guidelines - The Court relied on Mrinmoy Maity v. Chhanda Koley to hold that offering alternate land is permissible under guidelines dated 15.04.2015 when the initially offered land is found deficient or unsuitable. The alternate land offered by the 4th respondent met all specifications and was accepted due to the lessor's shifting stance. (Para 12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the 4th respondent was disqualified from LPG distributorship allotment because the land offered was also offered by another applicant, and whether acceptance of alternate land after application was permissible.
Final Decision
Civil Appeal dismissed. No order as to costs. Pending applications disposed of.
Law Points
- LPG distributorship allotment
- land eligibility
- lease deed
- co-owner consent
- alternate land
- field verification
- guidelines interpretation
