Disposed

M/S Tejaswa Gas Service v. State of U P and 2 Others

Allahabad HC16 May 2019WRIC/16557/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of a notice and direction to decide an application regarding unpaid installments due to river flooding. The court, without examining merits and noting an earlier representation, granted liberty to file a fresh representation within 10 days.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a fresh representation explaining difficulties within 10 days to the authority concerned.

M/S Tejaswa Gas Service Vs State of U P and 2… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16557 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- M/S Tejaswa Gas Service Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vishnu Pratap Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for the following relief:

¶6

"i. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice dated 12.04.2019 issued by the Additional District Magistrate Gazipur (Annexure No.6 to this writ petition).

¶7

ii. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent-District Magistrate Gazipur to decide the application of the petitioner dated 27.03.2019 (Annexure No.5 to this writ petition).

¶8

iii. To issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶9

iv. To award cost of the writ petition to the petitioner."

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner due to certain circumstances, which are beyond his control has not deposited the installments. In support of his submission, he has drawn our attention to some still photographs, which has been brought on record to indicate that due to the sudden rise of the river level, the entire area, which has been leased to the petitioner has submerged under the water.

¶11

We do not wish to enter into the merits of this case, as the impugned order gives the time to the petitioner to file his reply.

¶12

As prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner, we grant liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to the said order explaining his difficulties.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they have filed an earlier representation inviting the attention of the authority concerned to the difficulties mentioned above.

¶14

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, we dispose of this writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the authority concerned within 10 days. In the event, any such representation is made, we hope and trust that the same shall be considered and appropriate order is passed in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶15

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of .

¶16

Order Date :- 16.5.2019 A.N. Mishra

M/S Tejaswa Gas Service v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Tejaswa Gas Service v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Phoola Devi Alias Tara Gawde Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Nutan Bhardwaj Vs Ashish Kumar Sharma

Smt. Krishna Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Joganhi @ Raj Kumari and 2 Others Vs Union of India and 2 Others

M/S Modern Cultivation Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mahangoo Chauhan Vs Project Director, National Highway and 3 Others