- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19746 WP No. 3394 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 3394 OF 2020 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: MR.RAMESH B S/O. LATE.MADAPPA B, R/AT NO. 2-13, KODIMBABY POST AND VILLAGE, KODIMBADY, DK DIST – 574 325 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD (MD) INDANE AREA OFFICE, 4TH FLOOR, UNITY BUILDING, JCW ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 021, REP BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (LPG-S) …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SANTHOSH S NAGARALE, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTIFICATION DATED 23.01.2020 PUBLISHED IN UDAYAVANI- MANIPAL, A KANNADA DAILY NEWSPAPER, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT, CALLING FOR THE APPLICATIONS FOR AWARD OF LPG DISTRIBUTORSHIP OF IOC AT IN SO FAR AS SL.NO.18 AT KADABA OF D.K.DISTRICT, VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19746 WP No. 3394 of 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for following reliefs: a) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash the notification dated 23.01.2020 published in UDAYAVANI-MANIPAL, a Kannada Daily Newspaper, issued by the respondent calling for the applications for award of LPG distributorship of IOC at in so far as Sl.No.18 at Kadaba of D.K. District VIDE ANNEXURE-A; b) Issue writ of mandamus directing the respondent to issue the LPG distribution to the petitioner pursuant to his declaration as successful candidate in the draw of lots conducted on 28.06.2019 as communicated vide ANNEXURE-D. c) Grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the above case in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The respondenthad issued a public notification on 17.08.2017 in Udayavani-Manipal, Kannada Newspaper, calling upon the public to apply for allotment of a distributionship of LPG. The petitioner had submitted an application for the location at Kadaba found at Sl.No.177 under the said notification. By way of letter dated 02.07.2019 the petitioner was informed that the petitioner had been declared as the successful - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19746 WP No. 3394 of 2020 candidate subject to verification of the location and as such, called upon the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/- for such purpose. Though the petitioner had furnished a demand draft for the said amount on 08.07.2019, the respondent vide letter dated 10.07.2019 issued a reminder for the said deposit. Subsequently the respondent also issued a notification on 23.01.2020 for the very same location and other location inviting fresh applications. It is challenging the same, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. 3. On appearance, the respondent has filed objection contending that the location which had been offered by the petitioner was not in terms of the notification. What is offered was a property bearing Sy.No.70-1(B)(B1) Kadaba Road, Kadaba Panchayat limits Kadaba and not in Kadaba and as such, the field verification tests not being successful, the application of the petitioner was rejected and a fresh notification was issued on - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19746 WP No. 3394 of 2020 23.01.2020. Before doing so, the respondent had also called upon the petitioner to make available alternate plan by its email dated 06.08.2019, which was followed upon with a reminder on 23.08.2019 and again email dated 23.09.2019 clearly intimating that the offered land was not in conformity with the notification and also provided an opportunity for the petitioner to make available the land already offered for a showroom instead of for distribution and storage of LPG, as issued under the notification. 4. Sri.S.Rajashekar, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, 4.1. The land which has been offered by the petitioner is within the Kadaba Village Panchayat, therefore it satisfies the requirement of the notification and as such, he submits that said land ought to have been taken into consideration during the field verification conducted by the respondent. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19746 WP No. 3394 of 2020 4.2. His submission is that the selection of the petitioner having been completed on 02.07.2019 and the fees having been collected, the respondent could not have issued a fresh notification cancelling the selection of the petitioner. 4.3. Lastly, he submits that no opportunity has been granted to the petitioner to substitute a property in Kadaba to that which had already been furnished by the petitioner and as such petitioner is required to afford an opportunity. 5. Sri. Abhay, learned counsel for the respondent would submit that, 5.1. The notification clearly specifies that the land must be situated in Kadaba and not in the Panchayat in Kadaba since the location is described as “STHALA-Place”,the respondent therefore required a place in Kadaba and not in Kadaba Panchayat limits since the purpose - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19746 WP No. 3394 of 2020 ofestablishing a unit is in Kadaba for LPG distribution. 5.2. At the time when it was considered, the verification has made at the address in document which had been furnished as selection was completed, but during the field verification, it was found that property was not in Kadaba and therefore, an opportunity was granted vide e-mail dated 06.08.2019, 23.08.2019 and 23.09.2019 for substitution of the place which was not complied with by the petitioner resulting in fresh notification being issued on 23.01.2021. Therefore, he submits that said notification is proper and correct. 5.3. Lastly, he submits that due to interim order which had been passed, the respondent has not been able to establish LPG distribution centre in Kadaba in last 5 years. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19746 WP No. 3394 of 2020 6. Heard Sri.S.Rajashekar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Abhay, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the records. 7. It is not in dispute that the notification which had been issued by the respondent was for establishment of LPG distribution centre in Kadaba as indicated supra. It is further not in dispute that the petitioner has made available a property document during the field verification of a property which is situated at Kodimbala Village of Puttur Taluk, within Puttur Taluk Sub-registration District of Dakshina Kannada. The contention of Sri.S.Rajashekar is that it is situated within 2 kms from Kadaba and it is on Kadaba Road. The cost of distribution being borne by the petitioner, the distance would be immaterial insofar as the respondent is concerned since the cost would be borne by the petitioner. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19746 WP No. 3394 of 2020 8. The alternate land which had been offered post the email dated 06.08.2019, 23.08.2019 and 23.09.2019, by way of affidavit submitted on 25.09.2019 is situated on Kadaba Road, Kadaba Panchayat Limits, Kadaba. Thus, he submits that this alternate land satisfies the requirement. 9. On enquiry whether this land is in Kadaba, he fairly submits that the said land is not situated within Kadaba but in Kadaba Panchayat Limits on Kadaba Road. 10. In my considered opinion, the said submission would not answer the notification which had been taken out by the respondent. The establishment of centre by the respondent is based on the requirements of the area which is considered by the respondent and the notification issued. If a location is changed to suit the convenience of the petitioner, the same would not suit the convenience of the respondent and its - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19746 WP No. 3394 of 2020 customers and as such, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the alternate location which has been offered by the petitioner is situate close to Kadaba cannot be accepted. It was but required for the petitioner to satisfy the requirements of the notification and then approach this Court. Ex-facieit is clear that the petitioner has not satisfied the requirements and this litigation has beenpending for the last 5 years. The notification having been issued in the year 2019, a distribution centre has not been capable of being established by the respondent in Kadaba for the last 6 years. Apart from the financial losses that might have been caused to the respondent, what would also have to be looked into is the inconvenience that has caused to the residents in and around Kadaba due to non establishment of such a distribution centre. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19746 WP No. 3394 of 2020 11. It being clear that the petitioner has not satisfied the requirement, the land initially being located in Kadimbala Village and subsequent alternate land being situate in Kadaba Village, Kadaba Panchayat and not in Kadaba, there are no grounds which have been made out by the petitioner,the petition would have to be dismissed permitting the respondent to complete the process in terms of the notification dated 23.01.2020. However, since the petitioner has filed the present petition without having satisfied the requirements and seeks to substitute a land which does not satisfy the requirement and has the benefit of an interim order for the last 5 years, which petitioner ought not to have had, I am of the considered opinion that costs should have to be imposed. Hence, cost of Rs.10,000/- is imposed which shall be paid to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority within 15 days from today. If not paid within that time, the Karnataka State Legal - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19746 WP No. 3394 of 2020 Services Authority would be free to recover the said cost as arrears of land revenue. 12. Petition stands dismissed. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE DR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26