Facts
The petitioner had operated a petroleum retail outlet under the Physically Handicapped Woman category.
Source reference: p. 2After difficulties arose over renewal of the lease for the outlet’s site, she ceased operating it; the outlet was subsequently taken over by two incoming partners.
Source reference: pp. 2–9She alleged that she had been compelled to relinquish the dealership and sought an LPG distributorship at Sankarankovil under the same category, or other relief.
Source reference: pp. 2–9She sought a writ of mandamus based, in part, on a representation dated 1 February 2026.
Source reference: p. 2Issues
Whether the petitioner could be directed, by mandamus, to receive an LPG distributorship under the Physically Handicapped Woman category as rehabilitation for losing her retail outlet.
Source reference: p. 9Whether relief could be granted in light of the circumstances in which the petitioner ceased operating the retail outlet, including interim compensation and consideration of her request for an LPG distributorship.
Source reference: pp. 9–11Law Applied
Under Article 226, a writ of mandamus cannot compel an authority to create or make an allotment under a category for which no statutory provision, policy, scheme, or other supporting material has been shown to exist.
Source reference: p. 9The Court also stated that interim monetary relief could be granted in the peculiar circumstances without prejudice to a claim for damages before a competent civil court or in arbitration, leaving any further compensation to those proceedings.
Source reference: pp. 9–10Reasoning
The Court declined to order an LPG distributorship under the requested category because the record did not establish that such a category or rehabilitation scheme existed; it therefore could not issue a positive mandamus for that allotment.
Source reference: p. 9However, having regard to the petitioner’s long association with the retail outlet and the circumstances in which she ceased operating it, the Court directed interim compensation while preserving the parties’ rights and the petitioner’s ability to pursue further damages.
Source reference: pp. 9–10It separately directed the respondents to consider her LPG distributorship request in accordance with law.
Source reference: p. 10Holding
The writ petition was disposed of without directing the respondents to allot an LPG distributorship.
The respondents were ordered to pay the petitioner ₹15,00,000 as interim compensation within eight weeks of receiving a copy of the order, without prejudice to further claims for damages.
Source reference: pp. 10–11They were also directed to consider her distributorship request in accordance with law.
Source reference: pp. 10–11No order was made as to costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
Source reference: p. 11Original Court PDF
SubbuthaivsThe Divisional Manager
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
