https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191294 A subsequent allottee of a fair price shop who entered only because the original allotment had been cancelled had no independent legal right to challenge an appellate order restoring the original allottee's licence and allotment. The Court treated the later allottee as a third party to the dispute between the original allottee and the State authorities, and held that she was neither a necessary nor a proper party. Her presence in the proceedings did not create locus standi, and natural justice did not apply because no separate legal right of hers was curtailed. The writ petition was therefore not maintainable at her instance. en-us Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:27:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191294 A subsequent allottee of a fair price shop who entered only because the original allotment had been cancelled had no independent legal right to challenge an appellate order restoring the original allottee's licence and allotment. The Court treated the later allottee as a third party to the dispute between the original allottee and the State authorities, and held that she was neither a necessary nor a proper party. Her presence in the proceedings did not create locus standi, and natural justice did not apply because no separate legal right of hers was curtailed. The writ petition was therefore not maintainable at her instance. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191294