TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (9) TMI 640
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n runs from 2(d) to 2(g) as under:- "2(d) Resident of Thouhal District for a period not less than 5 years immediately proceeding the date of application. (e) Having family (as defined in the application form) income not more than Rs. 50,000/- annually (last financial year). (f) Not having any dealerships/distributorships of any Oil Company. (g) Having no close relatives (as defined in the application form) as a dealer/distributor of any Oil Company. However, details of the eligibility criteria and conditions as mentioned in the application form will be applicable." 3. Thereafter, interview was held on 19.12.95 and the petitioner appeared before the Selection Board along with others. It is stated that the respondent No. 2 vide his letter dated 20.12.95 recommended respondents 3 & 4 for grant of distributorship for Indane, respondent No. 3 at SI. No. Land respondent No. 4 at SI. No. 2 Letter of intent was also issued in favour of the respondent on 7.1.96 Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed CR. No. 254/96 at Principal Seat. The interim order was passed on 17.1.96 not to give effect to the letter of intent dated 7.1.96 issued in favour of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntrol of the petitioner. Therefore, the contention of Mr. A. Nilamani Singh cannot be accepted. 7. Nomination of the 3rd respondent has been assailed on the ground that the eligibility criteria laid down by the advertisement dated 4.10.95 has been violated. The eligibility criteria laid down in Clause 2(d) to 2(g) are alleged to have been violated. "2(d) Resident of Thoubal District for a period not less than 5 years immediately preceeding the date of application." (underlined is mine) 8. It is contended by Mr. N. Kerani Singh that the 3rd respondent is a resident of Mayang Imphal Thana Khunou Leikai in Sub-Division Imphal West-II, Imphal District, Manipur and not a resident of Thoubal District, Manipur. In this connection, Id. counsel has referred to the extract copy of the electoral roll, 23 Mayang Imphal Assembly Constituency Roll 1995, Polling Station No. 23/9 Mayang Imphal Boys L.P School, in which the name of the 3rd respondent appeared in SI. No. 58, Ld. counsel has also referred to the extract copy of Electoral Roll - 1993 of Inner Manipur Parliamentary Constituency, 23 - Mayang Imphal Assembly Constituency, Polling Station No. 23/9. Mayang Imphal, in which t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Electoral Roll of 36 Wagagai Assembly Constituency in Thoubal District. From the aforesaid circumstances, it clearly appeared that the 3rd respondent was not a resident of Thoubal District for a period not less than 5 years immediately proceeding the date of application as enjoined under Close 2(d) of the eligible criteria. Therefore, 3rd respondent did not fulfill the eligibility criteria 2(d) at the time of submission of application. 10. In CR. No. 743/96 the petitioner prayed for quashing the resident certificate dated 23.10.95 issued by the D.C, Thoubal. Admittedly, the resident certificate dated 23.10.95 has been issued on the basis of an application dated 6.10.95 filed by the 3rd respondent: In the application for resident certificate the petitioner has stated that the petitioner has been residing in Thoubal District for the last about 9/10 years till date. It will be noticed that in the application dated 23.11.95 for registering his name in Thoubal District, the petitioner stated that his age was 23 years and 6 months. If the statement made by the 3rd respondent in his application dated 6.10.95 is treated as correct, the 3rd respondent was aged about 12/13 years when ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in residing there and in interest in ancestral property does not give Court jurisdiction under S. 20 of the Code." Therefore, no man properly instructed in law would have issued the resident certificate dated 23.10.95 on the basis of the report as quoted above. 13. Eligibility criteria 2(e) - Having family (as defined in the application form) income not more than Rs. 50,000/- annualy (last financial year). On this ground it is contended by Mr. N. Kerani Singh that the 3rd respondent and his family has annual income not Jess than Rs. 1,00,000/- being collected from Motor Workship at Mayang Imphal as well as from Bus and Truck Services, earned by him in addition to the income from K. Jemon Gas Service and therefore, he is not eligible as per the eligible condition 2(e). It is also contended that the 4th respondent Shri Maibam Ranjan Singh is an employee as a Firm Junior Accountant in the Manglem Transport Agency of the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (Assam Oil Division) and his monthly income in the form of salary is Rs. 3,000/-. It is alleged that father of the 4th respondent Shri Maibam Budhi Singh is a Govt. School Teacher drawing a monthly salary of more than Rs. 4,000/- and t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt is not eligible under Clause (g) of the advertisement dated 14.10.95 16. In paragraph 9 of the counter of the 3rd respondent, it is stated that Mr. Thangkhomang Sihgsit, a resident of New Lambulane (New Chcckon) was appointed as distributorship of L.P.G by the I.O.C Ltd., Digboi under the appointment letter dated 12.1.96 and the said Thangkhomang Singsit has appointed Shri Kongkhom Manglem Singh, elder brother of the 3rd respondent in the form of attorney and manager to run and carry the business of Gas Service in the name of Jemon Gas Service, Singjamei. It is stated that Kongkham Manglem Singh is only the agent and employee of Mr. Singsit. A perusal of the letter dated 12.16 (Annexure-R/5) issued by the Chief LPG Manager it clearly appeared that one Shri Thangkhomang Singsit has been appointed as LPG distributor of K. Jemon Gas Service. Mr. Thangkhomang Singsit also filed affidavit stating that he has been appointed as distributor of LPG by letter dated 12.1.96 and he has been running his business as distributor of LPG at Imphal under the firm name or style Jemon Gas Service. It is also averred in paragraph 3 that due to his long association with Shri Kongkham Manglem Singh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant case by giving preference to Employed Graduates, the intentment of the scheme for which it is made, has been made frustrated. Therefore, the nomination of the 4th respondent in SI. No. 2 is also liable to be quashed. 19. It is now remain to be seen as to what relief petitioner is entitled. In CR. No. 592/95 the petitioner has prayed for the following relief: 2(a) Issue a rule calling upon the respondents to show cause why the impugned selection and the letter of intent dated 7.1.1996 issued in favour of the respondent No. 3 should not be set aside and quashed. (b) Issue a rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the petitioner should not be selected as Distributor for Indane for Kakching Town by issuing a direction in place of the respondents No. 3 and 4." 20. It is submitted at the bar by Mr. Nilamani Singh that altogether about 14 candidates appeared before the interview. According to Mr. Nilamani Singh since the other candidates have not been impleaded as party respondents, no effective relief can be granted to the petitioner. I entirely agree with the Id. counsel for the respondents. The remedy under All 226 of the Constitution is an....