Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Smt Radhika Chauhan vs U O I And Ors on 8 November, 2017
Author: Alok Sharma
Bench: Alok Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4471/2013
Smt. Radhika Chauhan W/o Shri Radhey Shyam Chauhan, 22,
Vidyut Nagar, C Chitrakoot, Behind Akshardham Temple, Jaipur
(Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India, through Secretary of Petroleum and Natural
Gas, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. Bharat Petroleum Corporation, Territory Manager(retail), Jaipur
3. General Manager (marketing) Bharat Petroleum Corporation,
Jaipur
4. General Manager (retail-north) Bharat Petroleum Corporation,
A-5 And 6, Sector-1, Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, (U.P.).
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.B. Mathur with Ms. Meenal Ghiya.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. J.P. Gupta.
Mr. Pawan Sharma.
Mr. Harsh Sharma.
_____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA Order 08/11/2017 Under the extant policy of the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India allotments of retail outlets for dispensing MS/HSD were to be made by the Oil Companies under the Rural Development Plan with certain percentages of allotments for Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes. In (2 of 6) [CW-4471/2013] pursuance to the aforesaid policy the respondent-Bharat Petroleum Corporation (for short, 'BPCL') called for applications from SC (Women) category for allotment of petrol pumps. The successful of the applicants were to be given a fully developed retail outlet constructed at the costs of BPCL over the land purchased by it--both from the Corpus Fund Scheme. The costs expanded on the setting up of the retail outlet as determined by the respondent-BPCL were to be recovered from the allottee in 100 equated monthly installments commencing the 13 th month of commissioning of the retail outlet dealership.
The petitioner as an applicant for allotment of the SC (W) dealer-ship was chosen for a retail outlet under the rural marketing plan with location Goner Region, District Jaipur. For setting up the retail outlet at the aforesaid location BPCL wrote to the JDA for allotment of an appropriate parcel of land. Vide letter of allotment dated 21.08.2007 the requisite parcel of land was allotted by the JDA to the BPCL on cost of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (one crore). Lease deed dated 21.09.2007 was then executed. Possession was handed over to BPCL on 26.09.2007 which thereupon sought to commence activities for the development of the retail outlet. Disputes however then arose between the allottee BPCL and the Khatedars who claimed ownership and (3 of 6) [CW-4471/2013] possession of the aforesaid land leased by JDA to BPCL stating the land had not been lawfully acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1989 or otherwise and hence neither the State nor the JDA had any authority to further allot it. A petition SBCWP No.68/2009 titled Ram Kishore & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. questioning the legality of the acquisition of land in issue is pending before this Court where an order of status quo obtains. It appears that in regard to the dispute as to ownership and possession of the land leased by JDA to BPCL, a FIR was also lodged by BPCL against the erstwhile Khatedars of the land alleging obstruction in the development of the land allotted by the JDA for setting up a retail outlet. That has however been of no avail and a final report (negative) has been filed by the police following investigation accepted by this Court and attained finality. It has also transpired that BPCL has filed petition SBCWP No.20113/2012 against JDA praying in the facts of the case interalia for allotment of the alternative parcel of land in lieu of land leased under deed dated 21.09.2007 for development of a retail outlet for dispensing MS/HCD.
It is, in the aforesaid context that this petition has been filed with the followings prayers :-
1.Direct the respondents to hand over fuel station to the (4 of 6) [CW-4471/2013] petitioner on the land earmarked in accordance with allotment conditions of the LOI.
2.Direct the respondents to handover COCO fuel station on temporary basis to the petitioner till the fuel station allotted to the petitioner is handed over by settling all the disputes.
3.Restrain the respondents from canceling the allotment and withdrawing LOI and restrain them from implementing the letter dated 12.07.2012.
4.Such further relief for which the petitioner is entitled may also be awarded in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of the petition.
As far as the prayer No.1 is concerned it is presently quite obviously redundant, in view of the fact that a retail outlet has not been set up on the land allotted by the JDA to the respondent-BPCL, for the reasons of a dispute pending over the acquisition of the land allotted and order of status-quo obtaining in regard thereto in the case of Ram Kishore & Ors. (supra).
As far as prayer No.2 is concerned, Mr. J.P. Gupta, counsel for the BPCL, in the course of hearing of the petition has brought to the notice of this Court a registered letter dated 06.02.2017 addressed by BPCL to the petitioner-Smt. Radhika Chauhan wherein she has been required, (in the circumstances obtaining where the retail outlet allotted to her under LOI dated 18.10.2005 under the Rural Development Plan cannot be constructed and made over to her for reason of pending dispute/ litigation in regard thereto), to chose on a stop gap arrangement amongst the four Temporary COCO's retail outlets set out in the (5 of 6) [CW-4471/2013] letter. It has been submitted that in the event the petitioner were to choose a temporary COCO in terms of the letter dated 06.02.2017 it would not eclipse her right to allotment of the retail outlet under the letter of intent dated 18.10.2005 in the event land is made available by JDA following the decision in SBCWP No.68/2009 or otherwise in the Goner Region within reasonable time. It has been submitted that if a clear title of the requisite parcel of land is obtained from the JDA, the retail outlet under the Rural Development Plan would be developed in the Goner Region and handed over to the petitioner on the terms and conditions set out in the letter of intent dated 18.10.2005.
Having considered the respective contention of counsel, I am of the considered view that in the facts and circumstances noted hereinabove it would be appropriate to dispose of this petition as under:-
1. That the petitioner as holder of LOI dated 18.10.2005 shall be free to exercise her option amongst the four temporary COCOs referred to in the letter dated 06.02.2017 issued by the respondent-BPCL subject to such COCOs presently being vacant.
2. That in the event the land in the Goner Region for setting up a retail outlet under the Rural Development plan dispensing (6 of 6) [CW-4471/2013] MS/HSD whether under JDA's lease dated 21.09.2007 or otherwise in terms of directions interim or final in SBCWP No.20113/2012 titled Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. Appellate Tribunal Jaipur & Another becomes available, it shall be developed and in terms of the LOI dated 18.10.2005 handed over to the petitioner on the terms and conditions set out therein.
The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(ALOK SHARMA) J.
Himanshu/60.