Disposed

Nawab Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 Sept 2019WRIC/16143/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the respondent failed to act on the petitioner’s application for a new electricity connection under the U.P. Supply Code, 2005. The Court directed the designated respondent to consider the application and pass a reasoned order within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 4 to consider the application for a new electricity connection and pass a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks.

Nawab Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16143 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Nawab Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhiresh Kumar,Akhilesh Chandra Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kapil Dev Singh Rathore

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

We heard Sri Akhilesh Chandra Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Jitendra Kumar, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Ajay Kumar, learned Advocate, holding brief of Sri Kapil Dev Singh Rathore, learned counsel for respondent and learned Standing Counsel and perused the record.

¶6

By means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent concerned to give electricity connection to the petitioner.

¶7

According to the pleadings, as have been raised in the present writ petition, the petitioner applied for a new electricity connection on 05.03.2019. However, he submits, till date no action has been taken for grant of electricity connection to him.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further drawn our attention to the relevant provisions as contained under Chapter IV of U.P. Supply Code, 2005.

¶9

We have gone through the relevant provisions as contained under Chapter IV, particularly clauses 4.1, 4,3 and 4.4

¶10

which cast obligation upon the licensee namely the respondents herein, to consider the application of the petitioner for new electricity connection and if otherwise there is no legal impediment, to ensure that electricity connection is granted speedily within a month.

¶11

We find no justification, therefore, for inaction on part of the respondents to linger on the matter and not to take any decision either to grant electricity connection or to refuse the same for the reasons to be accorded.

¶12

In such view of the matter, we are disposing of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent no. 4 to consider the application of the petitioner for grant of new electricity connection and pass a reasoned and speaking order, either way, positively within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶13

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 12.9.2019 Nadeem Ahmad

¶15

(Ajit Kumar,J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.)

Nawab Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nawab Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Uttarakhand Jan Kalyan Parishad Vs State of U.P. and Others

Sudama Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Sri Digamber Jai Samaj Thru Its President Vs Asst. Housing Commissioner/Asst. Registrar and Another

Ashok Kumar Pathak and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Mehar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U P and 2 Others