HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11497 of 2025 Court No. - 17 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Adarsh Kumar Maurya, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Alok Srivastava, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State, Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha and perused the records. 2. By means of the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the validity of an order dated 15.11.2025, passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Dhaurahra, Kheri directing that a fresh open meeting of gram sabha be conducted for taking views for selection of fair price shop allottee. 3. The petitioner has submitted that in an open meeting of the gram sabha held on 10.09.2025 out of 815 persons present, 481 persons had voted in favour of the petitioner and thus she was selected for allotment of fair price shop. No person raised any objection during or soon after the proceedings and on 12.09.2025 a complaint was made that some outsiders were present in the meeting which has vitiated the selection of the petitioner. 4. An enquiry was conducted upon the complaint wherein it transpired that the numerous outsiders had participated in the meeting and several veiled women had participated in the meeting whose identity could not be checked. For this reason the Sub Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Adarsh Kumar Maurya Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Dilip Kumar Pandey Naaj Bibi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Khadh Evam Rasad Vibhag Lko. And 9 Others .....Respondent(s) Divisional Magistrate has ordered a fresh meeting to be conducted for selection of fair price shop dealer. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as no objection was raised either during the meeting or soon thereafter and for the first time the objection was raised by filing a complaint two days after the meeting, it appears that there was no illegality committed in the meeting and the complaint has been filed as an afterthought. 6. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the recommendation made in the open meeting is sent to the Block Development Officer who forwards the same to the SDM within fifteen days. Before any step could be taken in furtherance of the meeting the complaint has been made, the enquiry has been established and an enquiry report has been furnished. In these circumstances, the complaint has not been filed belatedly. 7. The learned Standing Counsel has further submitted that in any case the petitioner will not be prejudiced by holding of a fresh open meeting as the petitioner will have a right to participate in the meeting and stake her claim. 8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that when it has come to light by an enquiry report that some outsiders had participated in the meeting and some veiled women whose identity could not be established were also there which complaint has been made before the recommendation of the meeting could be furnished to the Block Development Officer in turn to the Sub Divisional Magistrate and before any final decision could be taken regarding allotment of fair price shop license the complaint has been made and an enquiry has been conducted. In these circumstances holding a fresh meeting for obtaining recommendations of allotment of fair price shop cannot be said to be suffering from any such error as may warrant any interference by this court. WRIC No. 11497 of 2025 2 9. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of by leaving it open for the petitioner to stake her claim for allotment fair price shop in the fresh open meeting of gram sabha which is scheduled to be held on 08.12.2025. December 4, 2025 Ram. WRIC No. 11497 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench