Allahabad High Court: The writ petition was filed before a Division Bench of Abhinava Upadhya and Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, JJ., challenging the order passed by Territory Manager, Bharat Petroleum Corporation where petitioner’s candidature for the award of LPG Distributorship under open category was rejected.
Petitioner had shown an amount of Rs 10,84,049 in his savings bank accounts in his application form whereas during the process of “Field Verification of Credentials”, it was found that the amount in question was in the current account and not in savings bank accounts, and in view of the variance and the fact that the petitioner did not fulfill the required eligibility criteria as per Clause 7.1 and Clause 11 of the Guidelines under the Brochure petitioner was not entitled to the award.
It was submitted that in the application form under Item 11 the amount present in savings bank account in a scheduled bank as on the date of application in the name of the applicant and members of ‘family unit’ was required to be provided. Further, it was not a case of deficiency or a curable defect which could be rectified as per the procedure under Clause 9.5 of the guideline.
High Court observed that in view of the legal position that the principles of natural justice cannot be applied in straitjacket formula and in a case where the opportunity of hearing would have made no difference to the outcome, it may not be necessary to strike down the decision. Court observed that the petition failed to point out any error or illegality in the order under challenge or any fundamental procedure defect leading to any injustice. Therefore, this petition was dismissed. [Parvez Hussain v. Union of India, 2019 SCC OnLine All 1606, order dated 23-01-2019]