Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

HAKIM SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' PRINCIPAL SECY. & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Hakim Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru' Principal Secy. & Ors. - WRIT - C No. 47696 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 14950 (31 August 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon.R.P.Misra, J.

Hon.Shishir Kumar, J.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri S.R.Yadav and learned counsel for the respondents Sri Ranjit Saxena.

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition stating therein that the demand made by the respondent-Power Corporation is wholly illegal and without jurisdiction as the petitioner at no point of time was having any electricity connection and he has never applied for any connection.  When the bill was raised then the petitioner requested the respondent authorities to make an enquiry on the spot to verify this fact that the petitioner is not a consumer of electricity but no spot inspection has been made by the respondents and illegally a demand to the tune of Rs.,22,751.00 has been raised against the petitioner.

In view of the aforesaid fact, we dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the respondent No.2 i.e. Dakshinanchal Vidutt Vitran Nigam Ltd. (U.P. Government Under taking) Agra through Executive Engineer (Commercial) to consider and decide the representation dated 31.7.2006 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition). It is further directed that the respondent No.2 will decide the said representation of the petitioner by a detailed and reasoned order within a period of two months from the date of production of the certified copy of the order.  Till the decision of the representation of the petitioner by the respondent No.2 no recovery be made against the petitioner.

With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.  

31.8.2006

SKD/47696/2006


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.