M. Muthusamy, v. Bpcl., Rep. by Its Deputy

O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by R.Vijayakumar, J.) The present review application has been filed by the appellant in W.A.(MD)No.73 of 2013 seeking to review the order dated

13.06.2014.

¶2The Writ Petitioner had filed the above said Writ Petition seeking to quash the order passed by the BPCL Limited, dated

11.01.2024, wherein his application for appointing him as LPG distributor has been rejected. The Writ Petition came to be dismissed on

07.12.2012. The petitioner herein had challenged the same in W.A.

(MD)No.73 of 2013. Pending the Writ Appeal, a direction was issued to the BPCL to conduct an enquiry with regard to the genuineness and validity of the experience certificate which was enclosed along with the application form by the Writ Petitioner. The Writ Appeal came to be dismissed on 13.06.2014, with an observation that the Field Verification carried out by the team disclosed that the certificate was unreliable. Seeking to review the said order, the present Review Application has been filed.

¶3The primary contention of the learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner is that the interim direction issued by this Court as against the authorities to conduct Field Verification with regard to the genuineness of the experience certificate has not been conducted by the authorities. In such circumstances, the order of the co-ordinate Bench ought to be reviewed.

¶4We had passed an order on 06.10.2025 directing the Territory Manager of the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., to be present in Court to report about the compliance of the interim direction issued by this Court.

¶5A typed set has been filed by the learned counsel for the respondents to the effect that the interim direction issued by the writ appellate Court has been complied with and enquiry has been conducted in the field. The documents relating enquiry have also been enclosed in the typed set of papers.

¶6A perusal of the typed set of papers clearly reveal that after field enquiry, BPCL had arrived at a finding, that the experience certificate, which was enclosed by the Writ Petitioner, is not reliable and therefore, his request for appointing him as LPG distributor at Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District has been rejected.

¶7In view of the above said enquiry report, we are of the opinion that there are no merits in the review application. Accordingly, the Review Application stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶8We hereby record the presence of Mr.Lalit Sherkar, Territory Manager, LPG, Thanjavur.

(C.V.K., J.) (R.V., J.) vsm

17.11.2025 Index : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No To

¶1Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Rep. by its Deputy General Manager, Regional Office,

No.1, Ranganathan Garden, Offi. 11th Main Road, Post Box No.1212 & 1213, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040.

¶2Territory Manager, Baharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., LPG Territory/Plant, MGB TB Sanatorium, Sengipatti, Thanjavur District. REV.APLC(MD).oNo.128oofo2014 oC.V.KARTHIKEYANoo,oJo. and oR.VIJAYAKUMARoo,oJo. vsm ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooREV.APLC(MD)oNo.128oofo2014 oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooDateoo:o17.11.2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 17.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR M.Muthusamy ... Petitioner Vs 1. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Rep. by its Deputy General Manager, Regional Office, No.1, Ranganathan Garden, Offi. 11th Main Road, Post Box No.1212 & 1213, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040. 2. Territory Manager, Baharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., LPG Territory/Plant, MGB TB Sanatorium, Sengipatti, Thanjavur District. 3.D.Sankar ... Respondents Prayer: Application filed under Order 47 Rules 1 & 2 r/w Section 114 of CPC to review the order passed in W.A.(MD)No.73 of 2013, dated 13.06.2014. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Saravanan For Respondents : No Appearance for R1 & R2 Mr.Natesh Raja for R3