Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:27255 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4368 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ranjeet Kumar Alias Pintu Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Food And Civil Supply,Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Balram Yadava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Mohan Singh along with Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35125 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ranjeet Kumar @ Pintu Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Secy.Food And Civil Supply Lko And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Balram Yadava,Deo Narayan Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Azad Khan Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State, Sri Mohan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner-Gaon Sabha and perused the material available on record. 2. The aforesaid writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner challenging an order dated 22.04.2025 whereby directions have been issued for holding a meeting afresh for selection of an allottee of fair price shop. 3. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that earlier the resolution was passed in favour of the petitioner on 21.11.2019, however, the same was subsequently cancelled by the Block Development Officer by means of an order dated 03.12.2019, which was challenged before this Court in Writ C No. 35125 of 2019. In the light of the said, the records of Writ Petition No. 35125 of 2019 were also summoned. Arguing both the the writ petitions the submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that once, the resolution has been passed in favour of the petitioner in an open meeting, it was incumbent upon the authorities to have placed the resolution for approval/disapproval before the Tehsil Level Committee as prescribed in III(1) of the Government Order dated 05.08.2019. He argues that once a resolution has been passed in favour of the petitioner, the same could not have been set aside by the Block Development Authority and thus subsequent action based upon said cancellation including the order dated 22.04.2025 are bad in law. 4. The counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Jagjivan Ram Versus State of U.P. and others, [2013 (118) RD 259], wherein it was considered that the resolution could be cancelled only in accordance with the Government Order dated 05.08.2019. There is no denial of the fact that the resolution can be cancelled only in terms of the description contained in part III(1), however, the writ petition still deserves to be dismissed for the reasons that more than six years have been passed as recorded above. 5. The counsel for the respondent on the other hand argues that subsequent to the cancellation of the resolution in favour of the petitioner, another resolution was passed in favour of a third person namely Sukhi Ram vide order dated 20.12.2019. It is also brought on record that the said resolution in favour of Sukhi Ram was challenged by the petitioner by amending the Writ Petition No. 35125 of 2019 in terms of the liberty given by this Court. 6. Considering the arguments raised by the petitioner and on perusal of record of Writ Petition No. 35125 of 2019, it is evident that a resolution was earlier passed in favour of the petitioner, which was cancelled on 30.12.2019. Thereafter, yet another resolution was passed in favour of one Sukhi Ram, which has also not been accepted, although prima facie, the mandate of Clause III(1) of the Government Order was not followed, however, the fact remains that since the year 2019, no final selection has been made with regard to allotment of fair price shop. As two allotments were made, the order impugned in the present writ petition calling for a fresh meeting on 22.04.2025 cannot be defaulted as admittedly, merely selection will not confer any vested right which is subject matter of approval by the Tehsil Level Committee. As more than five years have been passed, I do not see any reason to interfere with the said order. Needless to say that the petitioner would also be entitled to participate whenever the meeting is called subject to his eligibility. 7. Both the writ petitions are dismissed accordingly. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 Arun Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench