IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1128 of 2008 (M/S) Smt. Haruli Devi, W/O Late Hayat Ram, R/O Village Shivnathpur Nai Basti, Tashil Ramnagar, District Nainital. …………. Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand through District Magistrate, District Nainital and three others. ……… Respondents. Sri Sharad Sharma holding brief of Ms. Prabha Noliyal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri K.P. Upadhyay, learned Additional C.S.C. for the State-respondent nos. 1 to 3. Date July 18, 2008. Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. Heard Sri Sharad Sharma, holding brief of Ms. Prabha Noliyal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.P. Upadhyay, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record. This writ petition has filed for issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to hold any meeting of Gaon Sabha for the purposes of allocating the fair price license to the persons of its own choice till the petitioner’s application after the death of her husband is decided by the competent authority. According to the petitioner, her husband late Hayat Ram was granted a fair price shop licence for Gram Sabha Gandhinagar Shivnathpur Nai Basti, Tahsil Rmanagar(Nainital) by the District Supply Officer Nainital under the handicapped quota. The husband of the petitioner has died on 28-3-2008. The petitioner made an application to the respondent no. 3 on 26-5-2008 for grant of fair price shop licence in place of the name of her husband. Copy of the representation has been annexed as Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition. The representation is still pending before the Up Ziladhikari, Ram Nagar, district Nainital. The petitioner has made an averment in the writ petition that the Gaon Sabha is going to allot the fair price shop to one Durga Prasad in a contrary manner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the ends of justice would be subserved if a direction is issued to the respondent no. 3 to decide the representation of the petitioner by a speaking order within a time frame and the writ petition be disposed of finally. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent no.3-Up Ziladhikari Ramnagar (Nainital) is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner(copy Annexure No.4) by a speaking order, expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks form the date of production of certified copy of this order. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (B.S. Verma, J.) RCP