Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 107481 (ALL)

AMOD KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

WRIC/37892/2024 · 2025-02-26

Shekhar B Saraf, Vipin Chandra Dixit

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:27761-DB Court No. - 40 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 37892 of 2024 Petitioner :- Amod Kumar Respondent :- Union Of India And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Priti Choudhary,Sanjay Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Manoj Kumar Singh,Puneet Agarwal,Santosh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf,J. Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India and Sri Puneet Agarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2. 2. This is a writ petiton under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated March 14, 2024 whereby certain conditions have been put for grant of retail outlet to the petitioner. One of the said condition was that the lease should be valid for a period of 19 years and 11 months. 3. The aforesaid condition does not appear to be a valid condition as there has been delay on the part of the respondent authority in issuing the 'Letter of Intent' and on the date of application the petitioner was having the lease period of 19 years and 11 months. 4. With regard to second condition, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to enter into a sub-lease for the balance period of the lease wherein the petitioner shall be the lessee and the Petroleum Corporation shall be the sub- lessee. The condition being imposed by the respondent is that a tripartite agreement is required to be executed with the landlord as a party. However, upon perusal of the documents containing the rules and regulations one does not find any such requirement of a tripartite agreement. Hence, the insistence of such a tripartite agreement is without any basis in law. 5. In light of the above submissions, the petitioner is directed to complete the procedure for executing the sub-lease within a period of six weeks from date. The respondents authority are directed to act in accordance with law and not create any hindrance in execution of the sub-lease as required under the law. 6. With the above directions, the writ petiton is disposed of. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 Kuldeep (Vipin Chandra Dixit, J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf, J.) Digitally signed by :- KULDEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad