The Allahabad High Court on 25 March 2026 allowed the writ petition filed by Radhvendra Awasthi and quashed the order dated 29 January 2022 passed by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. cancelling the Letter of Intent dated 07 March 2020 issued to the petitioner for setting up a Retail Outlet at Newada Garhi (Kalyanmal), Kothawan-Mall Road (LHS) on MDR 74C, District Hardoi, Uttar Pradesh. A division bench comprising Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Indrajeet Shukla held that a mere typographical error in the advertisement mentioning ‘MDR’ (Major District Road) instead of ‘ODR’ (Other District Road) could not justify withdrawal of the LOI after the petitioner had acted upon it, incurred substantial expenditure, obtained all necessary permissions and developed a legitimate expectation that the project would proceed.
The Court noted that the petitioner’s application was successful after due verification and that he had completed all formalities as per the LOI. The cancellation was triggered solely by a representation dated 09 November 2020 made by one Mr. Binod Pandey, Advocate, claiming the road in revenue records was an ODR and not MDR. The bench observed that the Corporation itself admitted in the impugned order that the mistake was typographical and that, apart from this error, there was no dispute with the location and the petitioner’s application was complete in all other respects. The identity of the advertised location was never in doubt, as the advertisement clearly mentioned the village name (Newada Garhi, Kalyanmal), the road (Kothawan-Mall Road) and the district (Hardoi). No member of the public had complained that they were deprived of the opportunity to apply for the dealership due to the incorrect mention in the advertisement.
The Court rejected the Corporation’s defence based on the Lekhpal’s report, holding that even the query raised by the Land Evaluation Committee and the Lekhpal’s response did not create any serious dispute regarding the identity of the advertised location. The bench categorically held that cancelling the dealership after two years, when the petitioner had already expended a huge sum of money in creation of the petrol pump, was not just unfair but also without any basis in law. Relying on the Constitution Bench judgment in Sivanandan C.T. and others v. High Court of Kerala and others (2024) 3 SCC 799, the Court reiterated that legitimate expectation is an elementary requirement of the guarantee against arbitrary state action under Article 14 of the Constitution. Public authorities must act in a predictable manner and honour their representations unless there is an overriding public interest, which the Corporation failed to demonstrate in the present case, as no overriding public interest was shown by virtue of the impugned order.
The Court observed that the error was purely technical/typographical, involving only the wrong letter ‘M’ in place of ‘O’, and that the location was otherwise complete in all respects. No complaint had been received from any member of the public till the representation of Mr. Binod Pandey after a period of two years, and nobody from the public had raised any objection that he was deprived of submitting an application for allotment of the Retail Outlet due to the incorrect mention of the name of the location. The bench held that the cancellation could not be said to be in the larger public interest and that the action taken by the Corporation was without any basis in principle or rule, making it arbitrary and antithetical to the rule of law. The rule of law promotes fairness by stabilising the expectations of citizens from public authorities, and the Corporation utterly failed to justify the denial of the petitioner’s legitimate expectation. Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed. The impugned cancellation order was quashed and set aside, and the authorities were directed to continue with the Letter of Intent issued to the petitioner.
Case Title: Radhvendra Awasthi v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Thru. Its Chairman Cum Managing Director And Others
Case No.: Writ-C No. 1746 of 2022
Date of Judgment: 25 March 2026
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Indrajeet Shukla
Lawcutor 