Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26930 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4220 of 2025 Petitioner :- Reena Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Food And Civil Supply Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Priyam Mishra,Dhananjay Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta,Piyush Shrivastava Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today in Court is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Alok Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent no.6. 3. Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 16.04.2025 whereby the appeal preferred by respondent no.6 was allowed. 4. The facts are that respondent no.6 was allotted a fair price shop. Subsequently, on the basis of allegations levelled, the same was cancelled. Challenging the said order, respondent no.6 preferred an appeal. After cancellation of the license of the of respondent no.6, the petitioner was appointed as a fair price shop dealer which was a contingent allotment and was subject to the outcome of the proceedings initiated by respondent no.6 as is evident from the allotment letter dated 25.08.2023. 5. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was not heard when the appeal was decided. Reliance is placed upon a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ram Kumar versus State of U.P. & Ors.; Civil Appeal No.4258 of 2022 decided on 28.09.2022. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent argues that the appointment of the petitioner was a contingent appointment and was subject to the outcome of the litigation, as such, he was not a necessary party. The judgment in the case of Ram Kumar (supra) relied upon by the petitioner would be of no avail as in the said case the allottee was a clear allottee and his allotment was not a contingent allotment and in that context the Supreme Court had held that he had a right to be heard, however, in the present case, the allotment is a contingent allotment, as such, the petitioner had no right to be heard. 7. Considering the fact that the right of the petitioner flows from an allotment which is contingent in nature, no relief at his instance can be granted. Present petition is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 nishant Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench