R.K.AGRAWAL,JAYASHREE TIWARI,J - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) IT appears that some resolution was passed in favour of the petitioner by the Gram Sabha for allotment of fair price shop licence. Some persons who were aggrieved took up the matter in appeal before the Commissioner who vide order dated 19.11.1997 has allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to find out as to whether a third fair price shop in the village is required to be opened or not and if so, a proposal be got The order dated 19.11-1997 was challenged by the petitioner before this Court by means of writ petition No. 41362 of 1997 which was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 28.5.2009. This Court declined to interfere in the order dated 19.11.1997 passed by the Commissioner. However, a direction was given to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to pass appropriate order on the basis of direction issued by the Commissioner after giving fullest opportunity to the petitioner and aggrieved persons within two months. Pursuant thereto the Sub-Division Magistrate had passed an order in which the existence of a third fair price shop In the village has been found and the Gram Sabha has been directed to pass appropriate resolution. The petitioner has also been permitted to apply. By means of present writ petition the petitioner is challenging the or­der passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate on the ground that he had not been afforded opportunity otherwise he would have shown that resolution already existed in his favour and he had run the shop for a pretty long period.
(3.) WE are not inclined to interfere in the impugned order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate as the said order has been passed in terms of the di­rections issued by the Commissioner while deciding the appeal vide order dated 19.11.1997, The writ petition filed by the petitioner before this Court as already mentioned herein before has already been dismissed. Thus, the valid­ity of the order dated 19.11.1997 cannot be reagitated. In the order dated 19.11.1997 the Commissioner had given directions firstly, to find out as to whether a third fair price shop in the village is required to be opened or not and if it is required to be opened, then fresh proposal be got. Argument therein with the earlier proposal in which the petitioner was selected, was not accepted. Thai being the position, we are not inclined to interfere in the order.;