A person must demonstrate a legal grievance to maintain a writ petition; mere disappointment does not confer locus standi.

1. Heard Sri Shrawan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State - respondents.

2. By means of the present petition, petitioner has challenged the order bearing No. 705 [Editors Note: Vernacular Matter Omiited] / 2017 dated 5.12.2017 passed by the District Magistrate, Mahoba, District Mahoba (Annexure - 7 to the writ petition) rejecting the petitioner's application / representation dated 7.11.2017 for opening of an additional fair price shop in Gram Panchayat, Jaitpur, District Mahoba. Prayer has also been made to direct the respondents to pass fresh order after taking a fresh report from Block - Jaitpur regarding present population and the number of units with further direction to the respondents that if the population, as well as number of units, are more than 20,000 at present, to permit the petitioner to distribute the food grains after adjusting the number of units of all fair price shop keepers.

3. The facts of the present case are that initially one fair price shop in Gram Panchayat Jaitpur was granted to Pratap Kumar which was cancelled by order dated 07.01.2017 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kulpahar, District Mahoba. Thereafter the said fair price shop was allotted to the petitioner by order dated 4.5.2017 (Annexure No.2) after passing of the resolution dated 24.4.2017 in the open meeting in petitioner's favour. The petitioner did not commit any irregularity in distribution of essential commodities and there were no complaints against her.

4. Pratap Kumar filed Writ C No. 32931 of 2017 (Pratap Kumar v. State of UP. and another) against the order of cancellation dated 7.1.2017 which was allowed by this Court vide judgment and order dated 31.7.2017 (Annexure No.3) whereby the order dated 7.1.2017 was quashed and the respondents were directed to restore the licence of the petitioner therein / Pratap Kumar and to resume supply to his shop forthwith. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kulpahar by order dated 18.9.2017 restored the allotment of the fair price shop of Pratap Kumar in compliance of the order of this Court dated 31.7.2017 and by the same order the allotment which was made in favour of Smt. Jasoda Devi (present petitioner) on 15.5.2017 was also stayed till farther orders. The present petitioner thereafter filed Writ C No. 49901 of 2017 (Smt. Jasoda Devi v. State of UP. and 4 others) in which this Court passed the order dated 27.10.2017 (Annexure - 5.), without entering into the merits of the order dated 18.9.2017, directing the District Magistrate to decide the representation of the petitioner filed against the order dated 18.9.2017.

5. The petitioner thereafter filed representation dated 7.11.2017 before the District - Magistrate, District - Mahoba, (Annexure No.6), for opening of an additional fair price shop (6 shop) and to restore the supply of the essential commodities to her after allocation of equal units to all the fair price shops. This representation of the petitioner was rejected by the District Magistrate - Mahoba by means of the order dated 5.12.2017 (Annexure No.7), under challenge in the present writ petition.

6. This petition was filed on 31.8.2018. This Court by order dated 5.9.2018 granted time to the learned Standing Counsel to file counter affidavit. The petitioner was granted time to file rejoinder affidavit. It was made clear that the question of laches shall remain open.

7. The learned Standing Counsel filed counter affidavit and raised a plea in paragraph 13 thereof that the writ petition should be dismissed on the ground of delay. H