Dismissed

M/S Jai Krishna Cold Storage Pvt. Limitedd and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC16 Jun 2021WRIC/11270/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an impugned appellate order dismissing their appeal against an electricity assessment. The Court held the order was non-speaking and without application of mind. The appellate order was set aside for fresh consideration.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order of appellate authority set aside with liberty to decide appeal afresh within three months; writ petition allowed.

M/S Jai Krishna Cold Storage Pvt. Limitedd and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 5

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11270 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- M/S Jai Krishna Cold Storage Pvt. Limited And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vineet Kumar Singh,Hari Narain Singh (Senior Adv.)

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Baleshwar Chaturvedi

¶5

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri V.K.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents and Sri Ashutosh Chaturvedi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Baleshwar Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-Electricity Authority.

¶7

Considering the nature of the order being passed in the writ petition, learned counsel appearing for respondents-Electricity does not propose to file counter affidavit.

¶8

The petitioners being aggrieved by undated assessment orders based on checking report dated 12.8.2017 raising a demand of Rs. 43,94,819/against the petitioners, preferred statutory appeal under Section 127 of Uttar Pradesh Electricity Supply Code, 2003 (in short the Code), which has been numbered as Computerized Case No. C201803000002325. The appeal has been dismissed vide order dated 9.2.2021, which is impugned in the present petition.

¶9

Challenge by the petitioners to the impugned order has been made on the ground that the order is non speaking and without application of mind, inasmuch as, it does not consider the case of the petitioners.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the memo of appeal, which is enclosed as Annexure-7 to the writ petition, various grounds have been taken by the petitioners against the consumption of illegal electricity raised by the said assessment order. Accordingly, he submits that none of the grounds, raised by the petitioners in the memo of appeal, has been considered by the appellate authority while dismissing the appeal of

¶11

the petitioners.

¶12

Learned counsel for the respondents has defended the order passed by the appellate authority but could not point out from the order that the appellate authority has given due consideration to the grounds raised by the petitioners in the memo of appeal.

¶13

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds that the impugned order is non speaking order and without application of mind. Accordingly, the order of the appellate authority is not sustainable in the eye of law and as such, it is set-aside with the liberty to the appellate authority to decide the appeal afresh, after giving due opportunity to the petitioners, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of the Allahabad High Court.

¶14

Subject to the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶15

Order Date :- 16.6.2021 SKM

M/S Jai Krishna Cold Storage Pvt. Limitedd and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Jai Krishna Cold Storage Pvt. Limitedd and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 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

Herosons Constructions Private Limited Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kps Propbuild Private Pimited Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Chakresh Kumar Jain Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Rakhi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Other

Jai Prakash Vs State of U.P. and and Another

Smt. Zara and Another Vs State of U P and 2 Others