HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 2791 of 2024 Court No. - 36 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that fishery lease was granted to one Ram Hari, who did not operate lease and thereafter the petitioner, who was not granted lease, moved an application for permitting the petitioner to deposit the amount for which permission was granted and the amount was deposited. Thereafter, petitioner approached the authorities to permit her to operate fishery lease. The said application was rejected on the ground that petitioner was never granted lease. Revision against the said order has also been dismissed. 3. Since the petitioner was never granted lease, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. However, in case petitioner moves an application for refund of money deposited by her, the same shall be considered and decided, in accordance with law. 4. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. May 5, 2026 Rishabh Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Adya Prasad Tewari, Devraj Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sudhir Bharti (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Reena Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of Up And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad