Disposed

Ashish Kumar Pradhan v. Managing Director Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam and 3 Others

Allahabad HC27 Jan 2021WRIC/578/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the writ petition primarily directing the Respondents to reconsider the petitioner's pending application regarding electricity dues assessment. Recovery proceedings were kept in abeyance pending the decision on the applicant's representation.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings stayed pending the Respondent's decision on the pending application; the matter to be disposed of within four weeks.

Ashish Kumar Pradhan Vs Managing Director… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 578 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Pradhan Respondent :- Managing Director Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Singh,Harsh Bardhan Choubey Counsel for Respondent :- Narendra Kumar Tiwari

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N.K. Tiwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos.1, 2 and 4.

¶6

The instant writ petition has been filed for the following main reliefs:-

¶7

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the recovery certificate dated 6.1.2020 issued by respondent no.3 (annexure -5 to the writ petition).

¶8

(ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondent no.2 to approve the amended/correct assessment revenue Rs.78,995/- + 80,000/- and direct to the respondents to deposit the corrected reassessment amount in any easy installments"

¶9

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is running an ice-cream factory, which was already closed. In pursuance of the provisional assessment, the recovery citation had been issued on 06.01.2020 to the tune of Rs.3,83,982/- beside other charges. However, an assessment was made for the electricity dues, against which, the respondent no.3 has sent a letter to the respondent no.2 on 28.02.2020 for partial approval of the assessment of the electricity dues. The said application, moved by the respondent no.3 to the respondent no.2, is still pending consideration in the office of respondent no.2 and no final decision has been taken till date.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of power corporation fairly submits that the respondent no.2 shall pass an appropriate order on the said application. Hence, some reasonable time may be allowed.

¶11

Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner is permitted to approach the respondent no.2 within two weeks by moving a representation

¶12

for consideration of the letter dated 28.02.2020 issued by the respondent no.3, who shall take an appropriate decision on the said application after giving due opportunity of hearing within four weeks and thereafter the petitioner is expected to abide the same.

¶13

Till any decision is taken on the said application, the recovery proceedings initiated against him shall be kept in abeyance.

¶14

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of .

¶15

Order Date :- 27.1.2021 Ravi/-

Ashish Kumar Pradhan v. Managing Director Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Kumar Pradhan v. Managing Director Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suman Vs State of U P and Another

Harindra Khari Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Shakeel Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Alluddin Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Shamshad Ali Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Hote Lal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others