Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/2552/2026 of SADAF HASSAN Vs INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER on 9 October 2026
130 Supp. 1 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) No. 2552/2026 CM No. (6933/2026) Sadaf Hassan …Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Iman Abdul Muizz, Advocate Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Limited And Anr. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, Dy.AG CORAM:
S. No. 130
Supp. 1
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) No. 2552/2026
CM No. (6933/2026)
Sadaf Hassan
…Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through:
Mr. Iman Abdul Muizz, Advocate
Vs.
Indian Oil Corporation Limited And Anr.
...Respondent(s)
Through:
Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, Dy.AG
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
ORDER
09.10.2026
1. Ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier she was allotted retail outlet by the IOC in handicapped category under the policy of Kisan Seva Kendra (KSK) dealership but owing to the dispute with regard to the premises over which the said retail outlet was to be laid, litigations followed. That during the currency of previous litigation, the respondents came up with a policy guideline of 2019 which provided that when a dealer is forced to vacate existing site by the lessor or any authority after the dealer has exhausted all the legal remedies up to the High Court and on that basis, the dealer was entitled to apply for reinstatement of the commissioned retail outlet dealership in terms of the policy. That despite representation the
Page 1 of 2
respondents are not considering her case, thus, leaving no other alternative for the petitioner other than to file this petition.
2. Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, Dy.AG waives of notice on behalf of the respondents and submits that in case any such representation has been made and in case the petitioner is able to demonstrate that there is an existing policy which comes to his rescue, the respondents are under corresponding obligation to consider the case of the petitioner provided in terms of the policy if any. His statement is taken on record.
3. This petition is taken up for consideration at the admission stage and without commenting upon the merits of the case, since the petitioner is stated to have already laid a representation which is Annexure-IX to this petition. In that background let the petition along with the documents annexed thereto be treated as a representation to be laid before respondents No. 1 and 2 who shall consider said representation in accordance with the policy of 2019 and proceed to pass a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.
4. Disposed of.
(SANJAY PARIHAR)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR: 09.10.2026 Akhil Dev
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…