Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21784-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2812 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mrs. Sonam Bharke Respondent :- Indian Oil Corporation Limited And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Dev Vyas Counsel for Respondent :- Shrey Sharma Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. Respondent-Indian Oil Corporation has invited applications for establishment of retail outlet at different locations including the present location at Mahoba. The brochure accompanying the advertisement placed three distinct categories for the land on which such retail outlet was to be established. Group 3 is the last in hierarchy in which the applicant could make application even without offering any land. This clause is applicable only to Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes category. The petitioner falls in this category. The brochure further provides that if there is no applicant available under Clause 1 and Clause 2 then an opportunity would be given to the applicant of Group-3 to provide land and if such opportunity is not availed within ninety days the application would be rejected. In the fact of the present case such claim of the petitioner has been rejected by the order impugned after noticing that the opportunity given to petitioner has not been availed. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent states that the respondent-Oil Company had sent intimation by mail on 29.07.2024 to the petitioner to offer land in terms of the brochure but this communication was not responded. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the letter was sent by mail but since it was sent to multiple persons, it landed in spam section, therefore, the petitioner could not access it and that is why the petitioner has submitted a representation as soon as the rejection of her application got communicated to her. It is submitted that there is no conscious failure on the part of the petitioner to act in terms of the brochure inasmuch as the petitioner was wiling to offer land to the Corporation for establishment of retail outlet. It is also submitted that since no other person has come forward with an offer, no useful purpose would be served in issuing fresh advertisement at this stage. Sri Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation opposes the claim of the petitioner. Be that as it may, in the facts of the case, we are of the view that ends of justice would be met if an opportunity is given to the petitioner to highlight her grievance, as noticed above, by approaching the respondent no.3 along with copy of this order. Various factual issues including the fact as to whether a valid communication was sent to petitioner on 29.07.2024 is left open for examination by respondent corporation. The respondent no.3 would deal with petitioner's grievance and would take an appropriate decision, as may be warranted in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks, from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Virendra Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR BHARTEEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR BHARTEEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad