RASIDA KHANAM BARBHUIYA Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(GAU)-2017-7-97
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on July 26,2017

Rasida Khanam Barbhuiya Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

MOUMITA PODDAR VS. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

A.M.BUJOR BARUA - (1.)Heard Ms. B. Devi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P.J. Saikia, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) and also Mr. P.P Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4.
(2.)An advertisement was issued by the respondent No.2 being the BPCL dated 31.10.2010 inviting applications for appointment of dealers for retail outlet in the State of Assam. One such location mentioned in the advertisement was for a retail outlet at Lala Bazar in Hailakandi district. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted her application. Column-12 of the application requires the information to be provided as regards the details of the land. The petitioner had offered three plots of land and the owners of the respective plot were shown as Sifot Ali Barbhuiya, Imran Ali Barlaskar and Swhwakat Ali Barlaskar and one Hussain Ahmed Choudhury. In respect of all the three land owners, the petitioner indicates that the concerned lease deeds were enclosed. In course of its consideration, the respondent authorities ultimately considered the 3rd plot of land offered by the petitioner i.e. the land covered by Dag No.348, 350, 351, 352, 353 of Jalalpur Road. After such consideration, the respondent authorities found two persons to be qualified for being called for the interview i.e. the petitioner and the respondent No.4. Upon such interview being held, the respondent authorities prepared a comparative statement of the marks given to the two candidates.
(3.)From the comparative statement, it is seen that the petitioner Rasida Khanam Barbhuiya was allotted 20.5 marks in respect of land and infrastructure whereas the respondent No.4 was allotted 28 marks. In respect of the other criteria, different marks had been allotted, but the difference in the marks between the two candidates is so small that the same would not have an impact of its own and the entire selection is ostensively being made on the basis of the respective marks given for the category land and other infrastructures.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.