Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:146867 Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 27539 of 2025 Petitioner :- Vaishno Prenana Swayam Sahayata Samuh Charmara Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Ashwani Kumar Mishra,Avdhesh Narayan Tiwari,C.S.C. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. Heard Sri Sanjay Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State-respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Ashwani Kumar Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 3. 2. The petitioner has preferred the present petition inter alia with the prayer to quash the order dated 10.06.2025 passed by the respondent no. 2 in Case No. 86/2025 (Computer Case No. C20250700000086) under section 13(1) U.P. Essential Commodities (Sales and Distribution Regulation) Act and order dated 23.07.2025 passed by the respondent no. 4. 3. Facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that petitioner was appointed as fair price shop dealer by the order passed by the respondent no. 4 dated 18th December, 2024. Aggrieved against the aforesaid, respondent no. 3 namely Smt. Saroj preferred an appeal before the respondent no. 2 as provided under section 13(1) Essential Commodities Act being Appeal No. 86 of 2025. In the said appeal the order passed in favour of the petitioner dated 18th December, 2024 was cancelled and the matter was remanded back before the respondent no. 4 to decide the same as fresh on merit. Aggrieved against the aforesaid, the petitioner has preferred the present petition. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner's group namely Vaishno Prenana Swayam Sahayata Samuh is an earlier group and the respondent no. 3 group namely Rohani Swayam Sahayata Samuh is later group, therefore, on the basis of priority according to Goverment Order dated 07.07.2020, the fair price shop was rightly allotted to the petitioner. 5. On the other hand it is argued by the counsel appearing on behalf of respondents that no prejudice has been caused to the petitioner by the order impugned since matter was only remanded back by him before the respondent no. 4. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. With the consent of parties, without interfering merit of the case the present petition is finally disposed of directing the respondent no. 4 to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law as per the order dated 10.06.2025 passed by the respondent no. 2 most expeditiously and preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Order Date :- 23.8.2025 Arti Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad