Sunita vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 20150 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:154942
 
Court No. - 6
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 25370 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Sunita
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ganga Shankar,Arun Kumar Sharma
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

Heard Mr. Arun Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-State.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the impugned order dated 15.03.2023 passed by respondent no.2 wherein appeal of the respondent no.4 was allowed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is subsequent allottee and has the right to be heard prior to passing of any order in respect to the shop in question. The respondent no.4 was the original fair price shop license holder whose license was cancelled against which appeal was filed. The petitioner being subsequent allottee moved an application before the appellate authority requesting that he has the right to be heard in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ram Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2023 (158) RD 625.

He further submits that the subsequent allottee is the necessary party in the proceedings, as the orders passed in favour of original allottee adversely affects the interest of subsequent allottee. In support of the aforesaid contention, he has also relied upon the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Yogendra Prasad vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2023 (158) RD 578.

Learned Standing Counsel could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

Counsel for the parties agree that the writ petition may be disposed of finally at this stage without calling for a counter affidavit specifically in view of the order proposed to be passed today.

Under such circumstances, the impugned order dated 15.03.2023 passed by the respondent no.2 is set aside. It is directed that in case the petitioner files afresh application before the respondent no.2 requesting for giving opportunity of hearing, within two weeks from today alongwith a certified copy of this order, the respondent no.2, i.e. Additional Commissioner Saharanpur Mandal, Saharanpur shall decide the appeal of the respondent no.4 afresh, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as respondent no.4, in accordance with law, by a reasoned and speaking order, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

It is made clear that this Court has not examined the merits of the claim of the petitioner and the authority concerned shall apply its own mind strictly in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition stands allowed.

Order Date :- 2.8.2023

Jitendra/-