HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9671 of 2025 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. 2. It is argued by the Counsel for the petitioner that the application of the petitioner was not considered solely on the ground that the demand draft of the security money was furnished by someone else. It is stated that the said demand draft was furnished by the husband of the petitioner. 3. Learned Standing Counsel based upon telephonic instructions states that the process of allotment has already come to an end. 4. In view thereof, no further orders can be passed. The writ petition is dismissed. 5. The petitioner would be at liberty to take such steps challenging the subsequent allotment, if any. September 25, 2025 akverma Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : I.M. Pandey Ist, Ajeet Verma Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Sandhya .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food And Civil Supplies Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench