Disposed

Smt. Haleem Sadiya v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Jan 2022WRIC/960/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition wherein the petitioner sought a direction for the decision of her application for a fair price shop licence. The Court directed the second respondent to decide the application within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 2 to decide the petitioner's application dated 20.12.2021 strictly in accordance with law within three months.

Smt. Haleem Sadiya Vs State of U.P. and Another — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 72 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 960 of 2022 Petitioner :- Smt. Haleem Sadiya Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhanu Prakash Tiwari,Ram Mani Upadhyay

¶2

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents through vedio conferencing.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after the death of her husband, petitioner has filed an application for allotment of licence of fair price of shop under Dying in Harness Rules in accordance with Government Order dated 5.8.2019, but the same was rejected vide order dated 28.9.2021 only on the ground that against the deceased husband of petitioner, a criminal case under Section 3/7 of E.C. Act was registered in which final report was not accepted. He next submitted that now vide order dated 15.12.2021, final report has been accepted by the C.J.M., Sant Kabir Nagar, therefore, petitioner is entitled to get licence of fair price shop. He furher submitted that she has also filed an application dated 20.12.2021 before the respondent no.2, but till date same has not been decided. Lastly, he submitted that a suitable direction may be issued to the respondent no.2 to decide the application of the petitioner dated 20.12.2021 at the earliest.

¶6

Learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents submitted that his application shall be considered and decided strictly in accordance with law within stipulated period.

¶7

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent no. 2 to decide the aforesaid application of the petitioner dated 20.12.2021 strictly in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶8

It is made clear that Court has not adjudicated the case on merits and it is upon the respondent no. 2 to decide the aforesaid application of the petitioner after considering the relevant Acts, Rules, Government Orders, Judicial pronouncement made by the Court as well as facts of the case.

¶9

Order Date :- 24.1.2022 Junaid

Smt. Haleem Sadiya v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Haleem Sadiya v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Urmila Devi Vs State of U P and 11 Others

Bhuteli and 2 Others Vs D.D.C. Kushinagar and 3 Others

Raju Alias Kamlesh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 11 Others

Manish Kumar Singh Vs State of Up and 4 Others

Ramesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Satya Prakash Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 16 Others