SHIV PRASAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri A. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Sri Anuj Kumar appearing for respondent No. 5.

(2.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus meeting respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to allot the shop in question in favour of the petitioner in pursuance of the proposal of Gaon Sabha dated 14th February, 2011 and further to pass appropriate order on the applications dated 25th February, 2011 and 28th March, 2011.

(3.) LEARNED Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, refuting the submission of counsel for the petitioner, contends that there being no resolution in favour of the petitioner in the open meeting, the petitioner is not entitled for allotment of the shop. It is submitted that the Government orders regulating the allotment of fair price shop do not contemplate selection of fair price shop dealer by lottery system. LEARNED Standing Counsel has relied on the Government order dated 3rd July, 1990 as well as Government order 17th August, 2002 copies of which Government orders have been placed before us for perusal.