Disposed

Upasana Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC21 Oct 2024WRIC/8983/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the fair price shop lottery allotment to respondent no.5 citing procedural lapse under a 2019 Government Order. Court issued notice to select committee representatives and stayed further allotments.

What did the court decide?

Issue notice to respondent no.5; stay further allotment to respondent no.5; list as fresh.

Upasana Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Consumer Protection | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 5

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8983 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Upasana Srivastava Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food And Civil Supplies Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today in Court is taken on record.

¶6

2. Heard.

¶7

Issue notice to respondent no.5. Steps be taken within a week. List as fresh on the date to be indicated by the office in the notice.

¶8

By means of instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for cancellation of the fair price shop lottery of which has been made in favour of respondent no.5.

¶9

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the fair price shop in question is situated in an urban area. The allotment of fair price shop is governed by the Government Order dated 05.08.2019, a copy of which is Annexure-7 to the writ petition. It is contended that as per para (VI) of the said government order, the entire procedure for allotment of fair price shop is indicated. Placing reliance on Clause (3) of Para (VI) of the said Government Order for urban area, the contention is that the said government order specifically provides that the meeting of the selection committee for the purpose of allotment of fair price shop should be advertised and that all the eligible persons should be sent a written notice with regard to the said meeting and that the receipt of the said notice should be obtained and kept safely.

¶10

Placing reliance on the averments contained in paragraph 14 of the petition the contention is that no notice of the said date has been given by the respondents which thus vitiates the lottery which has been carried out and in which respondent no.5 has been found successful.

¶11

Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is granted a week's time to seek instructions as to whether the provisions of Para (VI) of the Government Order dated 05.08.2019 have been

¶12

complied with for the purpose of lottery system and the manner in which the said compliance has been done.

¶13

Till the next date of listing, the allotment, if any, if not already made in favour of respondent no.5, shall not be made.

¶14

Order Date :- 21.10.2024 A. Katiyar

¶15

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Upasana Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Upasana Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Lallite Filling Centre, a Sole Proprietorship Thru. Smt. Vijayakirti and Another Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Petroleum and 3 Others

Amar Singh Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Food andCIVIL Supplies Lko.and Ors.

M/S Gobind Ram and Sons Barabanki Thru. Partner Mohit Agrawal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax and Registration, Lucknow and Others

Tulsi Ram vs Settlement Officer Consolidation, Sitapur and 2 Others

Mohammad Sarfaraj Minor Thru. His Father Ajaj Ahmad and 11 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lko. and 8 Others

Ram Khelawan Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others