Partly allowed

M/S Prem Engineering v. U.P. Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited and 3 Others

Allahabad HC10 Jun 2022WRIC/16790/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court held that a notice to vacate a quarter issued without seeking the petitioner's explanation violated principles of natural justice. The petition was disposed of by converting the notice into a show-cause notice.

What did the court decide?

Impugned notice treated as show-cause notice; direction to vacate abeyant pending reply and decision.

M/S Prem Engineering Vs U.P. Jal Vidyut… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16790 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- M/S Prem Engineering Respondent :- U.P. Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amaresh Sinha,Anubhav Sinha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

¶5

Heard counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ankit Saran for respondents 1, 2 and 3.

¶6

Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no.4.

¶7

The petitioner has called in question a notice dated 18.5.2022 issued by respondent no.3 stating that a Quarter owned by U.P. Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. is in illegal possession of the petitioner and he has been called upon to vacate the same within ten days, failing which, force will be used to get its vacant possession.

¶8

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents have issued the impugned notices to vacate the Quarter without calling for explanation of the petitioner. It is submitted that the said Quarter was allotted to the petitioner on 14.3.1966.

¶9

In our opinion, the impugned notice requiring the petitioner to vacate the Quarter without seeking his explanation is clearly in breach of principles of natural justice.

¶10

Consequently, the instant petition is disposed off by providing that the impugned notice will be treated to be a show-cause notice. The petitioner will submit his reply within two weeks from today and whereupon, the concerned respondent will decide the same by means of a speaking order within next two

¶11

weeks.

¶12

For a period of four weeks or till the decision in the matter, the impugned notice insofar as is directs the petitioner to vacate forthwith, shall remain in abeyance and thereafter shall abide by the decision that shall be taken on the objection/reply of the petitioner.

¶13

In case, objections/reply are not filed by the petitioner within two weeks from today, it shall be open to the concerned respondent to proceed further in the matter, in accordance with law.

¶14

Order Date: - 10.6.2022 CS/-

¶15

(Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.)

¶16

Digitally signed by CHANDAN SINGH Date: 2022.06.13 10:29:09 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

M/S Prem Engineering v. U.P. Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Prem Engineering v. U.P. Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited and 3 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

Ram Kishan and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ashok Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ajij and Another Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Harun Ali Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anant Kumar Agarwal Vs U.P. Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited and 3 Others

Land Management Committee Gram Panchayat Karauti Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others