In Brief
The appellant applied for an LPG distributorship with HPCL and was ranked first in the merit list after interview and evaluation. The candidature was later cancelled via a vague order citing incorrect information, but without specifying grounds. A High Court single Judge allowed his writ petition, finding the cancellation unjustified. The Division Bench reversed this, citing FDR discrepancies not mentioned in the original order. The Supreme Court held that a cancellation order cannot be substantiated by reasons invented later; it must state specific grounds contemporaneously. Public authority decisions must be construed objectively from the order's language alone. The Court set aside the Division Bench judgment, restored the single Judge's order, and directed HPCL to issue a Letter of Intent awarding the distributorship to the appellant within six weeks.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.