Disposed

Vishwas Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Nov 2022WRIC/33120/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted interim relief preventing coercive recovery measures for two months while directing the petitioner to file objections to the provisional assessment notice and checking report. The court mandated a reasoned decision by the Executive Engineer within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

No coercive measure for two months; direction to submit objections to Executive Engineer; direction to decide within four weeks.

Vishwas Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 33120 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Vishwas Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Khalid Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Narendra Kumar Tiwari

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶5

The challenge is to the final assessment notice and the demand notice for recovery of assessed amount towards electricity theft.

¶6

The petitioner herein submits that the allegations of theft of electricity are false, inasmuch as, no first information report has been lodged against the petitioner and moreover, the provisional assessment notice based on the checking report has never been served upon the petitioner depriving him of giving explanation to the action taken by the respondent.

¶7

Sri Narendra Kumar Tiwari, learned Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent No.2. On the basis of the written instructions received by him, he submits that based on the checking report dated 26.11.2020, the provisional assessment notice dated 19.01.2021 was sent to the petitioner through registered post. However, reply was not received from the petitioner and as such, the final assessment order was passed and the notice dated 13.04.2021 was sent to the petitioner demanding the electricity dues. The demand notice under Section 3 of the Government Electrical Undertakings (Dues Recovery) Act, 1958 had been, accordingly, issued on 24.07.2021, which is subject matter of challenge in the present petition.

¶8

Noticing the above facts and that as on date there is only a demand and no recovery citation has been issued against the petitioner, we permit the petitioner to file his objection before the Executive Engineer concerned namely the respondent No.2 to the provisional assessment notice as also the checking report, copies of which have been supplied to the counsel for the petitioner in the Court itself.

¶9

On submission of the objection alongwith copy of this order within a period of three weeks from today, the respondent No.2 shall be under obligation to take an expeditious decision in accordance with law preferably within a period of four weeks, thereafter.

¶10

For a period of two months or till a decision is taken by the respondent No.2, no coercive measure shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the demand notice dated 24.07.2021.

¶11

In case of default on the part of the petitioner, the respondent will be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶12

Order Date :- 4.11.2022 P Kesari

¶13

Digitally signed by PRACHI KESARWANI Date: 2022.11.09 10:42:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vishwas Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishwas Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Munni Lal Yadav Vs District Magistrate and 2 Others

M/S Chanda Construction and Traders and Another Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Smt. Urmila Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. and Others

Shirish Kumar Vs Union of India and 2 Others

Pooran Chand and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravi Gupta Vs Union of India and 3 Others