Smt. Sheela Devi vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 1142 ALL

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 1142 ALL
Judgement Date : 19 January, 2021

Allahabad High Court

Smt. Sheela Devi vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 19 January, 2021

Bench: Vivek Kumar Birla




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 4
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 22248 of 2020
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt. Sheela Devi
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Garg
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vishal Khandelwal
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Vishal Khandelwal, learned counsel appearing for the caveator respondent no. 5 and Sri P.K. Chauhan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents no.

Present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 18.9.2020 passed by the respondent no. 3 filed as Annexure-5 to the writ petition. A further prayer in the nature of mandamus to call for the records of the case and direct the respondent no. 3 to restore the appointment dated 27.4.2013 of allotment of fair price shop made in favour of the petitioner and to supply the essential commodities for distribution among the card holders forthwith has also been made.

Challenging the impugned order whereby the fair price shop licence of the petitioner has been cancelled on restoration of fair price shop licence of the original allottee Surendra Singh , submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the resolution was passed in open meeting and all formalities were completed, therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner is a subsequent allottee.

Per-contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner is a subsequent allottee and he has no right.

I have considered the rival submissions and have perused the record.

The petitioner is undoubtedly a subsequent allottee as he has been allotted fair price shop after cancellation of the shop of the original allottee Surendra Singh which was ultimately restored. He has no right in the light of the judgment in Poonam Vs. State of U.P. and others2016 (2) SCC 779.

This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 19.1.2021

p.s.