JUDGMENT Rohit arya, J. - Petitioner, holding a licence for trade of fruits & vegetables issued under Section 32 of the M.P. Krishi Upaj Mandi adhiniyam, 1972 (for brevity "1972 act"), is before this Court taking exception to the impugned auction notice inviting applications for auction of shops and plots in the existing market area in terms of the M.P. Krishi Upaj Mandi (allotment of Land and Structures) Rules, 2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner asserts that after issuance of notification by the State Government under Section 4 of 1972 act, the market yard has not been notified under Section 5, hence, there cannot be auction of shops or open plots pursuant to the impugned notice. However, neither the notification issued under Section 4 has been placed on record nor any subsequent notification issued under Section 5 based whereupon the petitioner may make a grievance of the nature canvassed in the writ petition. Shri Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.3 and 4, on the other hand, submits that new Sabji market yard has been established as per law and auctions are being conducted pursuant to the order dated 20.01.2022 passed by this Court in WP.4560/2021 [Shri Balendra Singh Yadav and Others Vs. MP State agricultural Marketing Board and Others]. Shri Jain, learned counsel, submits that this Court while disposing of the aforesaid writ petition has taken note of the fact of establishment of new market yard. Besides, in a Public Interest Litigation preferred bearing number WP.15024/2021 [Ramjeet Singh Rajput Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.], Division Bench of this Court vide its order dated 15.11.2021 has observed as under: "In view of the counter affidavit of respondent No.2, no further directions are required in the instant Public Interest Litigation. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the respondent No.2 and other respondents shall take prompt action ensuring that the entire day to day vegetable marketing activities are carried out at the new market at aB Road, behind Old Samji Market, Gwalior." As such, at the instance of the petitioner alleged objection is only in despair and with ignorance of the judgments of Courts referred above. Moreover, the new market is just behind the old Sabji Market and new market yard is having an area of over 8 hectares as against 02 hectares of adjacent old market yard. all required facilities are available there. Moreover, the new market is just behind the old Sabji Market and new market yard is having an area of over 8 hectares as against 02 hectares of adjacent old market yard. all required facilities are available there. as such shifting has been done in wider public interest for public convenience. Shri Jain, learned counsel, on instructions, also submits that the petitioner is an encroacher as he has been issued the notice for having encroached more area than what was allotted to him in the old market. Be that as it may, this Court upon perusal of the judgments passed by the Division Bench & Single Bench, the documents placed on record and submissions advanced is of the view that the impugned auction notice cannot be questioned at the instance of the petitioner who otherwise is free to apply for shop / open space under the impugned auction notice. Hence, no interference is warranted. Consequently, present writ petition sans merits is hereby dismissed.