Hon’ble Anil Kumar, J.—Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for opposite parties No. 1 to 4, Sri Mahmood Alam, learned counsel for opposite party No. 5 and perused the record.

2. By means of present writ petition, petitioner has challenged the orders dated 22.4.2015 passed by opposite parties No. 4 by which petitioner’s license/agreement to run the fair price shop has been cancelled and the order dated 16.2.2016 passed by opposite party No. 2 by which the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 22.4.2015 has been dismissed.

3. Sri Mahmood Alam, learned counsel appearing for opposite party No. 5 submits that petitioner has earlier filed Writ Petition No. 3548(MB) of 2015 and Writ Petition No. 7672 (MS) of 2016 and the said fact has been concealed by the petitioner while filing the present writ petition before this Court, so the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the sole ground.

4. Sri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that so far as Writ Petition No. 3548 (MB) of 2015 (Smt. Awadha Devi v. State of U.P. and others) is concerned, the same has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 6.1.2015 passed by licensing authority by which petitioner’s license to run the fair price shop has been placed under suspension. The said writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 29.4.2015 with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal. He further submits that thereafter petitioner filed an appeal (Appeal No. 284 of 2015) under clause 28(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Anusuchit Vastu Vitran Adesh,2004, the same was dismissed. Thereafter petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 7672 (MS) of 2016 thereby challenging the order passed by licensing authority as well as appellate authority. The same was dismissed on 11.4.2016 by this Court with the following directions :

“Sri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner wants to withdraw this petition with liberty to file fresh petition. Sri M.C. Yadav appears for the respondents.

Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.”

5. Accordingly it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that at the time of passing of order dated 11.4.2016 learned counsel representing opposite party No. 5 /Ashok Kumar was present and a liberty was given to the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition (Writ Petition No. 7672(MS) of 2016) as prayed for.

6. Sri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thereafter present writ petition has been filed by petitioner challenging the order dated 22.4.2015 passed by licensing authority and the order datd 16.2.2016 passed by appellate authority which was earlier challenged by the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 7672(MS) of 2016 and Sri Ashok Kumar was impleaded as opposite party No. 5. A copy of the writ petition was also given to opposite party No. 5 at the time of filing of the same, so in view of the said fact there is no necessity on the part of the petitioner to write in the writ petition, so the petitioner has written in para 1 of the writ petition as under :

“That the petitioner declares that no writ petition has been filed by her in respect of the subject-matter contained in this writ petition in this Hon’ble Court either at Allahabad or at Lucknow and this is first writ petition being filed by the petitioner.”

7. Accordingly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that said mistake on the part of petitioner is bona fide mistake without any motive behind in order to conceal in respect to filing of earlier writ petition.

8. Sri Mahmood Alam, learned counsel for opposite party No. 5 submits that it is mandatory on the part of the petitioner to state in the writ petition in respect to earlier writ petition as per Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 and once the petitioner has not mentioned in respect to filing of earlier writ petition by filing present writ petition the same is nothing but amoun