Dilip Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 1126 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 4
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24907 of 2020
 

 
Petitioner :- Dilip Kumar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashutosh Kumar Pandey
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State- respondents.

Present petition has been filed with following prayers:-

"i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondent no.2 to allot the license of the gram panchayat birdpur no.11 district- Siddharth Nagar in favour of petitioner's.

ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondent no.2 to decide the representation dated 06.02.2020 (Annexure-3) pending before respondent no.2."

On 5.1.2021 following order was passed:-

"Petitioner claims that there is a resolution in his favour, but the proceedings for allotment of the fair price shop license has not been concluded despite lapse of almost one year.

Learned standing counsel prays for and is granted two weeks' time to complete instructions.

It is further expected that if there is no legal impediment or genuine objection, the proceeding for allotment of fair price shop license would have been completed in the meanwhile.

Put up as fresh on 19.01.2021. "

Today, learned Standing Counsel submits that he has sent the letter but he has not received the instructions till date.

It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that creation of third fair price shop of which the petitioner was appointed as a dealer was challenged before this Court by one Sri Jhakari Gupta by way of a writ petition being Writ- C No. 12772 of 2018, which was decided by this Court vide judgment and order dated 9.4.2018 holding that appointment of additional fair price shop dealer is consistent with the law laid down in Suman Yadav case and the petition was dismissed. Submission is that till date fair price shop dealership license has not been issued in favour of the petitioner. He further pointed out that his representation is pending since long but no order has been passed on the same.

In view of the aforesaid facts, without going into merits of the claim of the petitioner, respondent no.2, Sub Divisional Magistrate Naugarh, District- Siddharth Nagar is directed to decide the claim of the petitioner on its own merit, strictly in accordance with law preferably within a period of one month from the date of production of self- attested copy of this order, which may be verified from the official website of this Court.

It is made clear that this Court has not considered the claim of the petitioner on merit.

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, present petition stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 19.1.2021

Aditya