- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10518 WP No. 22256 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.22256 OF 2021 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: MR.MAHADEVASWAMY R S/O RACHAIAH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS NO.149, RACHAPPAJI NILAYA VIVEKANANDA NAGAR T.NARASIPURA MYSORE DISTRICT PIN-571312 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.SUYOG HERELE E, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD REPRESENTED BY HEAD OF DIVISIONAL OFFICE MYSORE DIVISIONAL OFFICE NO.36/A, FIRST FLOOR B.N.ROAD, MYSORE TRADE CENTRE OPP KSRTC BUS STAND MYSORE-570001 2. M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., BY ITS MANAGER, MARKETING DIVISION KARNATAKA STATE OFFICE KALINGA RAO ROAD 29 MISSION ROAD SAMPANGI Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10518 WP No. 22256 of 2021 RAMANAGAR BENGALURU-560027 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SANTHOSH S NAGARALE, ADVOCATE FOR R.2 ALSO FOR R.1 (V/O/D 30.01.2025)) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMMUNICATION DATED 28.11.2021 ISSUED BY THE R-1 PRODUCED AT VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for the following reliefs. "i) Issue a Writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or order and quash the communication dated 28.11.2021 issued by the respondent No.1 produced at vide Annexure-A. ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the respondent to allot Retail outlet dealership to the petitioner by providing him an opportunity to comply with the requirements of the communication dated 16.08.2021 vide Annexure-F. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10518 WP No. 22256 of 2021 iii) Issue any other writ or order and grant such other further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Respondent No.1 had issued a Notification calling for applications for appointment of the grant of "Retail Outlets" on 25.11.2018 published in Kannada Daily "Vijaya Vani" and English Daily "Times of India". The said Retail Outlet being reserved for persons belonging to SC category, the petitioner had applied for the same under Category-III, there being three sub categories. The first category was for the applicants who already owned suitable land, the second category being of persons possessing the land on a long term lease and third category being of persons who did not possess the land, but if they offered suitable land after being selected their applications would be considered. 3. The petitioner needless to say in one who does not own any land nor have a long term lease but is a person, who was to offer land if selected. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10518 WP No. 22256 of 2021 4. The petitioner was informed by e-mail dated 16.08.2021 that he had been selected since there was no one available in category 1 and 2 was called upon to submit suitable land within a period of three months from the date of the letter. 5. The petitioner did not furnish any such land and as such, on 28.11.2021 vide Annexure-A, the application of the petitioner was rejected on account of non- compliance. On the very same date on 28.11.2021, considering that one other person, who was belonging to category 2 had replied and made available land on a long term lease allotment was made to the said person. The petitioner thereafter filed the above petition on 04.12.2021 and this Court on 07.12.2021 granted an order of interim stay. It is, thereafter, that the petitioner has sought to file an application to bring the subsequent allottees on record as also for amendment of the petition challenging the allotment made to the said person. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10518 WP No. 22256 of 2021 6. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner by inadvertence had missed out the e-mail dated 16.08.2021 and could not reply to the same and therefore, could not make available the land in time as indicated in the e-mail dated 16.08.2021. It is only on 28.11.2021 that the petitioner came to know and when he tried to reply to the said email, the email bounced with the message that the mail could not be delivered. A perusal of the e-mail would indicate that there are different addresses, which are in the email, one of the address is noreply@petrolpump dealerchayan.in, the other e-mail addresses also, which were available as indicated in the earlier email dated 16.08.2021 at Annexure-F. The petitioner by email dated 16.08.2021 at Annexure-F had been granted 3 months time to make available the said lands. 7. Similar offer was made to other applicants also. One of the applicant was diligent enough and made - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:10518 WP No. 22256 of 2021 available the land, the petitioner not being diligent did not make available the land. 8. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that no indulgence can be extended to the petitioner, who has not been diligent at the cost of a person, who has been diligent and made available the land. Any indulgence extended to the petitioner would be at the cost of a diligent person which would not be in the interest of justice. In that view of the matter, the application filed for impleading the person, who had already been allotted the lands, stands rejected. So also, the amendment application rejected since the same would not arise for consideration For all the aforesaid grounds, the petition is dismissed, the petition not making out any grounds. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2