Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35709 Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5855 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Santoshi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Verma,Santosh Kumar Kanaujia Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Kanaujia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Deep Sikha, learned Chief Standing Counsel representing the State-opposite party Nos.1 to 4. 2. By means of instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity of an order dated 23.05.2025 passed by the Joint Commissioner (Food), Lucknow Division, Lucknow in Case No.1873 of 2025 under Section 13(3) of Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016 whereby the petitioner's application for interim relief has been rejected although her appeal has been admitted and the matter has been fixed for hearing on 02.07.2025. 3. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that after admitting the appeal, it was incumbent on the part of the appellate authority to have passed a stay order in favour of the petitioner. The revisional Court has recorded in the impugned order dated 23.05.2025 that a perusal of the cancellation order dated 08.04.2025 prima facie indicates that an enquiry was conducted against the petitioner in furtherance of a complaint dated 08.10.2024. Statements of some card holders were recorded on 17.10.2024, in which, some card holders expressed dissatisfaction against the behaviour as well as performance of the petitioner and they alleged that the petitioner used to weigh lesser quantity of ration, make the ration card holders run repeatedly for getting their ration and taking illegal money for fulfilling the KYC requirement. The appellate authority has recorded that the petitioner could not make out any such ground as may warrant grant of interim relief to her and, accordingly, the interim relief application has been rejected. 4. I am of the view that the appellate authority has exercised his discretion based on cogent reasons and there is no good ground to interfere in the reasoned exercise of discretion by the appellate authority. 5. Learned Chief Standing Counsel has informed that the State Government has issued a Government Order dated 05.08.2019, regarding suspension/ cancellation and attachment of fair price shops and this Government Order, inter alia, provides that in case no interim order is passed in an appeal passed against the suspension/ cancellation order and a new licence for fresh fair price shops is granted, the order of allotment of new fair price shops must mention that the allotment is subject to the final order to be passed in appeal and in case the appellate authority allows the appeal, the subsequent allottee will not have any right. Therefore, the aforesaid apprehension of the learned counsel for the petitioner that grant of a licence to any third party during pendency of appeal will create any complication, is without any substance. 6. In view of the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of by observing that the appellate authority shall make every endeavour to decide the appeal expeditiously in accordance with law and, in case, any allotment is made in the meanwhile, it shall be subject to the aforesaid provision contained in the Government Order dated 05.08.2019 and the outcome of the appeal. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 17.6.2025 Shubhankar Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench