1 / 4 2025:CGHC:8547 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 984 of 2025 1 - Nidhi Agrawal W/o Shri Abhishek Goyal Aged About 33 Years R/o Ward No. 6, Jawahar Market, Nawapara, Ambikapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Through The Chief Regional Manager-Retail, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, 1st Floor, Bajpai Pavilion, Vyapar Vihar Road, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Head Of Regional Office Bilaspur Retail Regional Office, Hindustan Petroleum Coropration Limited, 1st Floor, Bajpai Pavilion, Vyapar Vihar Road, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Shri Jitendra Gupta S/o Himachal Gupta R/o Village Chandrapur, Police Station And Tehsil Bhatgaon, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Pravin Kumar Goyal S/o Gayanand Goyal Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Pakni, Police Station Jhilmili, Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Aarti Goyal D/o Ghanshyam Agrawal Aged About 23 Years R/o Sahid 2 / 4 Chandrashekhar Ajad Ward No. 16, Jawahar Market, Nawapara, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. Ali Asgar, Advocate (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 19/02/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the allotment order issued by respondents No.1 & 2/ Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL) whereby the respondent No.3 was selected for allotment of Retail Outlet Dealership within 2 km. of village Pakni, Bhaiyathan-Pratappur Road, District Surajpur (C.G.). He further seeks a direction towards the respondent authorities to cancel the said allotment order issued by the HPCL in favour of respondent No.3. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allotment of Retail Outlet Dealership to the respondent No.3 is contrary to the conditions which provides that the retail outlet should be within two kilometers from the village Pakni, Bhaiyathan-Pratappur Road, District Surajpur. He further submits that the said retail outlet is allotted to the respondent No.3 is situated at the distance of 4.5 kilometers from the village Pakni, Bhaiyathan-Pratappur Road, District Surajpur. By placing a report issued by the Revenue Inspector, he would further submit that the Revenue Inspector has certified the proposed land in which the 3 / 4 respondent No.3 has been allotted retail outlet, is situated at 4.5 kilometers from the village Pakni. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/ HPCL by placing an NOC dated 15/10/2024 issued by the Additional District Magistrate, submits that the NOC has been issued by examining all the conditions including the distance of place as per the conditions enshrined in the advertisement. A copy of the same has been produced before this Court, which is taken on record. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents as well as the NOC issued by the Additional District Magistrate. 5. The Collector has considered the particulars which have been dealt with while issuing the said NOC dated 15/10/2024 which reads as under:- (a) comments from the Revenue Department on the issue, regarding the possession of the site by the applicant is lawful and there is an authorisation from the land owner or leaseholder for developing premises under these rules for storage of petroleum products; (b) comments from the Police Department regarding traffic density and impact on traffic; (c) comments from the concerned Municipal Corporation or Gram Panchayat or local area development authority as applicable, regarding the conformity of proposal to the local area development planning including schools, hospitals and mitigating measure, if any, is provided, (d) comments from the National Highways Authority of India or Public Works Department or any other authority concerned regarding road safety, road alignment and road access conformity; (e) comments from the Fire Department regarding accessibility of the site to the fire tenders in case of 4 / 4 emergency and preparedness of fire services for combating the emergencies. 6. Even the Patwari, Karauti-B has also certified that the land where the respondent No.3 for which the allotment of retail outlet has been made is situated within two kilometers from the village Pakni. 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that there is no illegality in the allotment of retail outlet issued in favour of respondent No.3. 8. Accordingly, the present writ petition sans merit and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE $. Bhilwar