Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NARENDRA NATH DUBEY versus UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Narendra Nath Dubey v. Union Of India & Others - WRIT - C No. 28435 of 2002 [2007] RD-AH 2255 (12 February 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 34

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 28435 of 2002

Narendra Nath Dubey Vs. The Union of India and others

With

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 13652 of

Smt. Rachana Agrawal Vs. State of U.P. and others

~~~~

Hon. Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

Hon. Dilip Gupta, J.

The issue involved in both the above mentioned writ petitions relates to allotment of dealership of kerosene/LDO for Doodhi in district Sonebhadra and, therefore, both the petitions are being decided by a common judgment.

Writ Petition No. 28435 of 2002 has been filed by Narendra Nath Dubey for quashing the order passed by the Indian Oil Corporation rejecting the complaint filed by the petitioner against the appointment of Smt. Rachana Agrawal for the aforesaid agency at Doodhi.

Writ Petition No. 13652 of 2004 has been filed by Smt. Rachana Agrawal for quashing the order dated 28.2.2004 passed by the District Magistrate, Sonebhadra cancelling the earlier domicile certificate issued in her favour.

In the writ petition filed by Narendra Nath Dubey, we had passed a detailed order on 24.2.2006 which is as under:-

"This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 14th June, 2002 passed by the competent authority of the respondent Indian Oil Corporation Limited. Earlier this Court had directed the authority to reconsider the case after appreciating the materials placed before it. The authority has passed a very cryptic order without giving any reason whatsoever on both the issues regarding the residence as well as the income of the Respondent No.4. It has been observed that in view of the certificate of residence issued by the competent authority, it must be held that the Respondent No.4 was a resident of district Sonebhadra and after considering the Income Tax Return of her husband, affidavits and other documents filed by the parties, the conclusion that has been reached is that income was less than two lacs per year at the relevant time. The authority has not indicated what was the gross income shown in the return of that year and the certificate filed by the present petitioner before the said authority about the residence of Respondent No.4 has not been discussed anywhere.

The order impugned dated 14th June, 2002, therefore, cannot be sustained. The matter is, therefore, remitted on both the issues to be decided by the competent authority within a period of three months after giving opportunity to all the parties to lead factual evidence.

List the matter in the second week of July, 2006 for further hearing. Sri Padia will produce the order passed by the competent authority.

Interim order passed earlier shall continue till then."

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the Corporation passed an order on 7.9.2006 holding that as the residence certificate of Smt. Rachana Agrawal had been cancelled by the District Magistrate, Sonebhadra which makes her ineligible for the dealership, further investigation on the income of Smt. Rachana Agrawal would not make any material difference. Smt. Rachana Agrawal, therefore, filed an amendment application for quashing the order dated 7.9.2006 and for seeking some other consequential directions.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties in both the writ petitioners.

The records clearly indicate that during the pendency of the writ petition filed by Narendra Nath Dubey, the order dated 28.2.2004 was passed by the District Magistrate cancelling the earlier residence certificate issued in favour of Smt. Rachana Agrawal. The said order does not indicate that any opportunity whatsoever was given to Smt. Rachana Agrawal before passing the said order. We, therefore, find considerable force in the contentions advanced by the learned Senior counsel for Smt. Rachana Agrawal that the said order deserves to be set aside as it had been passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice. We, therefore, have no hesitation in quashing the order dated 28.2.2004 passed by the District Magistrate. It would, however, be open to the District Magistrate to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after giving adequate opportunity to the parties concerned. The parties may file the documents within a period of two weeks along with a certified copy of the order and the District Magistrate shall, thereafter pass the order within a period of six weeks.

It is only in the event that the District Magistrate comes to the conclusion that the earlier domicile certificate issued in favour of Smt. Rachana Agrawal does not suffer from any infirmity that it will be necessary for the Indian Oil Corporation to examine the issue regarding income of Smt. Rachana Agrawal as was required to be examined by our order dated24.2.2006. In such a situation, the Corporation shall pass an appropriate order after giving  opportunity of hearing to the parties within a period of six weeks.

With these observations, both the writ petitions are disposed of. Interim order passed by us earlier in favour of Smt. Rachana Agrawal shall continue till the matter is finally decided by the Corporation.

Dt/- 12.2.2007

Sharma


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.