WPMS 2404/2011 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Mr. Tanveer Alam Khan, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. J.C. Belwal, the learned counsel for the respondents. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length, the Court finds that no relief can be granted to the petitioner at this stage. It transpires that the petitioner filed an application for allotment of a shop in the year 2003. The allotment could not be made for one reason or the other which led to a spate of litigation and eventually, under the direction of the Court, the allotment was made in the year 2010. The petitioner was not allotted a shop. The allotment made by the Mandi Samiti in the year 2010 has not been questioned in the present writ petition. Consequently, the prayer of the petitioner that one shop may be allotted to the petitioner or the Mandi Samiti should be directed to construct one more shop for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is a handicapped person and according to the Rules of 2009, the Mandi Samiti is duty bound to allot a shop to a handicapped person. Such submission cannot be accepted for the reason that the Rules of 2009 was not taken into consideration when the shop was allotted by the Mandi Samiti nor such allotment procedure has been questioned in the writ petition. In the light of the aforesaid, the writ petition is dismissed with the observation that as and when the respondents undertake to make fresh allotment of shops, it will take into consideration the Rules of 2009. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) 15-11-2011 SP