HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 31939 of 2025 Court No. - 39 HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J. HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J. Mr. Sarvjeet Singh Chauhan, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, private respondent no.4 is his client's brother. Said respondent purported to grant lease in respect of private respondent no.5, of the property jointly owned by his client. Case is pending before the Revenue Court. In spite thereof the oil company went ahead and accepted candidature of private respondent no.5. His client made complaint. By impugned order dated 5th August, 2025, his client's complaint was rejected arbitrarily. He seeks interference. Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondent no.1 (UoI). Mr. Puneet Agrawal, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3 (the oil company). He submits, his client has done due diligence including from the administrative authorities and upon satisfaction obtained, granted the dealership to private respondent no.5. There be no interference. He relies on order dated 21st August, 2025 made by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ-C no.26004 of 2025 (Sanjay Kumar and another Vs. State of U.P. and 7 others) to submit, no interference is warranted. Paragraph 5 of the said order is reproduced below. "5. Apparently, the dispute is regarding right, title and interest in the land in question. We are of the considered opinion that said dispute cannot be decided in the present proceedings nor by way of representation to the administrative authorities. The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to avail such other remedies, as may be advised." Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Gupta, Sarvjeet Singh Chauhan Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Komal Mehrotra, Manoj Kumar Singh Laljeet Singh .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) We do not deem it necessary to direct issuance of notice on private respondent nos.4 and 5. The oil company says it has done due diligence. As such, we take it that there has been inquiry on the ground, on basis of which petitioner's complaint, rejected. Petitioner's contention is, the case against his brother is pending. The oil company is on notice of the pending litigation. In the circumstances we are not inclined to interfere. The writ petition is disposed of. (Arindam Sinha, J.) (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.) September 19, 2025 Gurpreet Singh WRIC No. 31939 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad