Suresh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies U.P. Lko. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Suresh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies U.P. Lko. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether the Division Bench should interfere with the learned Single Judge's direction to the authorities to take an appropriate decision for allotment of the new Fair Price Shop, given that the appellant's petition challenging the rejection of his candidature is pending and, as submitted by counsel, the entire issue is before a Larger Bench with interim orders.

Court's answer

The learned Single Judge's direction was clear: it required an appropriate decision for allotment in accordance with law and was expressly subject to any order being passed by any competent Court of law; meanwhile, the appellant's petition challenging the rejection of his candidature continues to remain pending before this Court with apparently no interim order granted so far.

Ratio / Principle

Seeking a direction to the authorities, in the present appeal, not to proceed with the matter cannot be countenanced; the appellant has to pursue his stay application in the pending writ petition.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Division Bench (Arun Bhansali, CJ and Jaspreet Singh, J), High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Special Appeal No. 260 of 2025, decided 18.8.2025 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:47992-DB). Appeal against order dated 04.08.2025 of the learned Single Judge in WRIT-C No.7169 of 2025, whereby the writ petition of respondent No.6 Mahendra Pratap Singh seeking a decision on allotment of a new Fair Price Shop at Village Madawa, Tehsil Musakirkhana, Amethi was disposed of with a direction to take an appropriate decision for allotment in accordance with law, subject to any order of any competent Court. The appellant, whose application for appointment under the Dying-in-Harness Rules stood rejected and whose challenge thereto was pending without interim relief, sought a direction that the authorities not proceed with allotment. Held: the Single Judge's direction being subject to orders of any competent Court, and no interim order existing in the appellant's pending petition, the request could not be countenanced; the appellant was left to pursue his stay application in the pending writ petition. Appeal disposed of.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47992-DB

Chief Justice's Court

Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 260 of 2025

Appellant :- Suresh Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. thru. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Counsel for Appellant :- Vindeshwri Pandey, Rakesh Devi Prasad Kumar

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Isha Mittal (A.C.S.C.), Shivangi Pandey, Kuldeep Pandey, Mohan Singh

Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

This appeal is directed against order dated 04.08.2025, passed in WRIT-C No.7169 of 2025, passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby while disposing of the writ petition, a direction has been issued to take appropriate decision for allotment, in accordance with law, which shall be subject to any order being passed by any competent Court of law.

The petition was filed by respondent No.6 Mahendra Pratap Singh seeking a direction commanding the opposite parties to take appropriate decision for allotment of new Fair Price Shop in Village Panchayat, Village Madawa, Pargana Jaidishpur, Vikas Khand, Bazar Shuluk, Tehsil Musakirkhana, Amethi.

During pendency of the petition, the appellant moved an impleadment application, inter alia, seeking intervention based on the fact that he has applied for appointment in Dying-inHarness Rules, which has been rejected.

After hearing the parties, learned Single Judge considering the fact that process of allotment has to be undertaken in accordance with law, passed the order disposing of the writ petition with directions, as noticed hereinbefore.

Counsel for the appellant made submissions that the learned Single Judge was not justified in directing the authorities to take appropriate decision for allotment inasmuch as the petition filed by the appellant questioning the rejection of his candidature is pending consideration before this Court and that the entire issue is pending consideration before the Larger Bench, wherein interim orders have been granted by the Larger Bench and, therefore, the learned Single Judge was not justified in passing the order.

We have considered the submissions made and have perused the material available on record.

The direction of the learned Single Judge is very clear requiring appropriate decision for allotment in accordance with law and subject to any order being passed by any competent Court of law. Admittedly, the appellant's petition seeking to challenge the rejection of his candidature continues to remain pending before this Court, wherein apparently there is no interim order granted so far.

In that view of the matter, seeking a direction to the authorities, in the present appeal, not to proceed with the matter, cannot be countenanced. The appellant has to pursue his stay application in the pending writ petition.

With the above observations, the appeal stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 18.8.2025 Rakesh/SL

(Jaspreet Singh, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench