Disposed

Ramesh Kumar Jain v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC18 Sept 2019WRIC/29577/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the Executive Engineer to grant a new electricity connection. Relying on the U.P. Supply Code, 2005, the court ordered the respondent to consider the application and pass a reasoned order within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 3 to consider the petitioner's application for new electricity connection and pass a reasoned order within four weeks.

Ramesh Kumar Jain Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 29577 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Ramesh Kumar Jain Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prasoon Tomar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard Sri Prasoon Tomar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pawan Kumar Mishra, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 5 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 respondents no. 3 namely the Executive Engineer 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 03.08.2019. However, he submits, till date no action has been taken for grant of electricity connection to him.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.

¶8

We have gone through the relevant provisions as contained under Chapter IV, particularly clauses 4.1, 4.3 and 4.4 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.

¶9

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.

¶10

In such view of the matter, we are disposing of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent no. 3 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.

¶11

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

¶12

Order Date :- 18.9.2019 IrfanUddin

¶13

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

Ramesh Kumar Jain v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Kumar Jain v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jile Singh Vs the State of U.P. and Others

Anjani Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy Panchayat Raj and Others

Ram Babu Kanaujiya Vs State of U.P. and Others

Ram Jeet Yadav Vs National Thormal Power Corporation and Another

Babita Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Ashok Kumar Vs Union of India Ministry of Petroleum and 2 Others