Point of law: Only aggrieved person, who has participated in the process of allotment of fair price shop can file appeal.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for State- respondents.

2. Present petition has been filed for writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 22.08.2017 passed by Joint Commissioner (Food), Saharanpur Region, Saharanpur- respondent no. 2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is resident of Village Parasauli, Block Kandla, Tehsil Budhana, District Muzaffarnagar and there are four fair price shop established in the said village having total number of 9230 beneficiaries. To meet out the interest of local residents, Gaon Sabha decided for establishment for 5th fair price shop in the same village. Accordingly, vide resolution dated 26.08.2016, decision was taken for allotment of fair price shop under the reserve category i.e. reservation of Gram Pradhan. Under the aforesaid resolution, three applicants, namely, Zakir (petitioner), Raees and Abdul Hasan applied for allotment of fair price shop and unanimously, it was allotted in favour of petitioner. After aforesaid resolution, an agreement was executed and now after completion of all legal formalities, he was issued allotment letter dated 21.10.2016 by respondent no. 4.

4. He next submitted that to utter surprise, Ex-Pradhan, namely, Satyendra Saini (respondent no. 5), on the very next date of allotment order i.e. 21.10.2016, filed an application before Block Development Officer, Block-Budhana, Muzaffarnagar alleging irregularities of process of allotment of fair price shop such as allotment was made without calling open meeting of Gaon Sabha. After receiving the aforesaid complaint, respondent no. 4 directed the Block Development Officer to hold enquiry vide order dated 25.10.2016. Pursuant to order dated 25.10.2016, Block Development Officer constituted enquiry committee of two members vide order dated 27.10.2016. Enquiry committee investigated the matter and vide its letter dated 04.11.2016 submitted enquiry report categorically stating that allotment of fair price shop in favour of petitioner was done in accordance with law. Respondent no.4 on the basis of enquiry report, passed the order dated 22.02.2017 directing the Regional Supply Officer, Supply Center, Budhana for allotment of essential commodities in favour of petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that against the very said order, complainant-respondent no. 5 filed an Appeal No. 21 of 2016-17 under Section 13(1) of U.P. Scheduled Commodities Distribution Order, 2016 before Commissioner, Saharanpur Region, Saharanpur, which was transferred before Joint Commissioner (Food), Saharanpur Region, Saharanpur-respondent no. 2 and respondent no. 2 vide its order dated 22.08.2017 contrary to settled provision of law and most mechanical manner, partly allowed the appeal filed by the complainant.

6. Learned counsel for petitioner is assailing the impugned order on two grounds, first of all, respondent no. 5 was not an applicant for allotment of fair price shop, therefore, he is not a person aggrieved. He is having no locus standi to file appeal and in support of that, he has placed reliance upon the judgments of this Court in the matter of Babu Ram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others; [2009 (10) ADJ 24], Neeraj Kumar Mishra Vs. Dy. Commissioner (Food) Region Allahabad and others, 2017 (3) AdJ 834 and Kailash Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others; (Writ-C No. 49975 of 2015) decided on 03.09.2015. Secondly, he submitted that in the impugned order, no finding is recorded either against the petitioner or violation of any procedure in allotment of fair price shop by the authorities, but partly allowed the appeal rejecting the order dated 21.10.2016 and remanded the matter back to Sub Divisional Magistrate-Respondent no. 4 to pass fresh order. He next submitted that under such legal and factual position, respondent no. 5 is not the person aggrieved and further there is no adverse finding against the petitioner in the impugned order, therefore, impugne