Distribution of State largesse by Public Authority

While a Public Authority cannot distribute State largesse arbitrarily, and all the eligible persons have to be allowed level playing field

The notice inviting Expression of Interest “First Round” for Franchiseeship of BSNL products and services for sales and distribution in Odisha Telecom Circle was sought to be quashed on the ground it restricted the right of existing franchisee to participate and thus it was arbitrary and the denial of right of equality. BSNL contended that in the new policy while the interests of continuing franchisee were duly safeguarded, the policy gave opportunity to new interested franchisee in the ‘First Round’ and the new policy was framed to ensure easy availability of BSNL products and services in all areas and encourage more competitive environment in the market. It was held that while a Public Authority cannot distribute State largesse arbitrarily, and all the eligible persons have to be allowed level playing field, it is not debarred from making an appropriate policy classifying different claimants aspiring to work for it. In the impugned EOI, the existing franchisees were treated as separate category with a view to give opportunity to the new competitors in new territories without debarring the existing franchisees, where suitable new competitors are not available. Only in the ‘first round’, the existing franchisees were not allowed to participate as per the impugned notice. The classification of existing franchisees as separate category thus cannot be termed as arbitrary and irrational. [M/S. SGBL(India)Ltd. Vs. BSNL] (Orissa HC, 21.02.2014)