Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80134 Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15382 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mamta Sahani Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sandeep Kumar Chaturvedi Counsel for Respondent :- Adeel Ahmad Khan,C.S.C. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. Heard Sri Sandeep Kumar Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no.1 to 5 and Sri Adeel Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the respondent no.6. 2. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the prayer to quash the order dated 23.04.2025 passed by respondent no.2 namely Joint Commissioner (Food), Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur. 3. The facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that fair price shop license of the respondent no.5-Rama Shankar was cancelled vide order dated 20.12.2019 by the respondent no.5- District Supply Officer, Maharajganj. Aggrieved against the aforesaid statutory appeal was filed by the respondent no.6 before the respondent no.2-Ditrict Magistrate, Maharajganj on 06.01.2020, which was numbered as RST/1749/2023. Ultimately the same was allowed by the respondent no.2 on 23.04.2025. After the cancellation of fair price shop license of the respondent no.6, petitioner was appointed as fair price shop dealer on 29.09.2022 for stop gap arrangements. Pursuant to the aforesaid petitioner continue to operate the aforesaid fair price shop. After the appeal filed by the respondent no.6 was allowed by the respondent no.2 the petitioner has preferred present writ petition. 4. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that the order passed by the respondent no.2 is ex-facie illegal since the respondent no.6 has committed irregularity in distributing the essential commodities to the card holders. 5. On the other hand it is argued by counsel for the respondent no.6 that petitioner was appointed as fair price shop dealer only for stop gap arrangements hence he has no locus/right to challenge the order passed by the respondent no.2. 6. From perusal of the record it is clear that petitioner was given proper opportunity of hearing by the respondent no.2 in the appeal filed by the respondent no.6. Petitioner has no locus to challenge the order passed by the respondent no.2 in favour of respondent no.6 since petitioner is only subsequent allottee. The law in this connection has been well settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ram Kumar Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in 2022 (11) ADJ 229. 7. In this view of the matter, present writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 15.5.2025 Pramod Tripathi Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad