Pradeep Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
Writ petition challenging electricity recovery proceedings was dismissed as the petitioner could have filed an appeal under Section 127 against the final assessment order challenging the assessment.
What did the court decide?
Writ petition dismissed.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7297 of 2021 Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- P.H. Vashishtha,Ranjeet Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pranjal Mehrotra
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondents No. 2 and 3.
The petitioner seeks to challenge the recovery proceedings for realization of the electricity dues on the allegations of unauthorized use of electricity/theft.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that no notice has been given to him before making final assessment and even inspection report has not been supplied to the petitioner.
The written instructions supplied by the counsel appearing for respondent-department is taken on record.
It is stated therein that the premises in question was inspected on 04.01.2020 and the petitioner had refused to receive the checking report. The notice dated 24.01.2020 was then sent to the petitioner to which no reply had been given by the petitioner. The final assessment order had then been passed and a demand notice under Section 3 was issued on 21.07.2020. As the petitioner did not furnish any reply to the demand notice, the recovery citation has been issued.
Noticing the above facts, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the copy of the inspection report had not been supplied to him and the notice of provisional assessment had not been served upon the petitioner, cannot be accepted.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Pradeep Kumar
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Sunita Agarwal
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · March
- Registered
- Case no.
- WRIC/7297/2021
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court