Meera Choudhary @ Meera Devi vs State Of Bihar and Ors

G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J

The petitioner has filed the instant application for the following reliefs:

“I. For issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the Order dated 8.2.2016 vide letter No.-267 issued by the Circle Office, Sadar, Darbhanga, by which No Objection Certificate has given in favour of respondent no. 9, namely Maghwendra Choudhary,

II. For issuance of writ of mandamus commanding the respondent authority to take legal action for the issuance of No Objection Certificate in the favour of respondent no.-9.

III. For issuance of writ of Mandamus commanding the respondent authority to stop the construction work of Petrol Pump out let.

IV. For issuance of writ of Mandamus commanding the respondent authority, particularly respondent no. 4 to 6 cancel the licence of Petrol Pump out let aforementioned plot.

v. For issuance of such other writ or order or direction which may deem fit and proper for consideration of this case.”

Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner, the State as well as the Learned counsel for the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and perused the records.

It is an admitted fact that the dealership in question was allotted to Respondent No. 9 approximately seven years ago, inspite of the objection raised by the petitioner. It is also not in dispute that Respondent No. 9 has been operating the said dealership since then. There were no interim order.

Further, from the pleadings and materials on record, it is evident that the Circle Officer received a complaint from the petitioner alleging that a Title Suit No. 230/2014, was pending before the Civil Court. However, upon obtaining a report regarding the said suit, it was revealed that neither Respondent No. 9 nor his mother were impleaded as parties to the said suit. Since Respondent No. 9 and his family members (mother/father), being purchasers and recorded tenants (Jamabandi holders) of the land, were in possession, there was no justification for the Circle Officer to withhold his recommendation, for the grant of a No Objection Certificate (NOC).

Further it appears from the record that no injunction order had been passed by any competent court with respect to the land in question, nor was there any legal impedement preventing the authorities from considering the land suitable for the intended purpose. Based on the report submitted by the Circle Officer, the District Magistrate, Darbhanga, issued the NOC vide Letter No. 975 dated 29.05.2018, addressed to the Senior Divisional Retail Sales Manager, IOCL, Muzaffarpur. Pursuant to receipt of the NOC and other requisite permissions and licenses, the Retail Outlet was commissioned on 25.07.2018, and a Dealership Agreement dated 14.08.2018 was executed between Respondent No. 9 and Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.

It is further evident from the material on record, that it was incumbent upon the petitioner to file and place on record all relevant documents establishing his title and possession over the land in question, before the Circle Officer and Indian Oil Corporation. However, the petitioner failed to produce any such documents before the appropriate authority. Accordingly, there appears to be no error or irregularity in the issuance of the NOC vide Letter No. 975 dated 29.05.2018 in favour of Respondent No. 9.

From the facts and circumstances of the case, it is also apparent that third-party rights have been created, and notably, the petitioner has not challenged the grant of dealership to Respondent No. 9 in the present writ petition.

In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the present writ petition.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.

Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.