Dismissed

Vijay Kumar Agrawal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2022WRIC/33180/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged an order determining electricity bill dues. The Court noted the petitioner's readiness to repay and existing relaxation on interest. Held not a fit case for interference, directing filing of appeal under Section 127.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file appeal under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 in case of dispute.

Vijay Kumar Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Money Laundering | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 33180 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar Agrawal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rishu Mishra

¶4

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

¶5

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he may be permitted to delete the respondent no.4 from the array of parties.

¶6

In view of the said statement, permission is granted to delete the respondent no.4 from the array of the parties and incorporation in this regard shall be made by the learned counsel for the petitioner within the course of the day.

¶7

The challenge is to the order dated 27.9.2022 passed by the Executive Engineer, Electricity Urban Distribution Division (EUDD)-II, Baxipur, Gorakhpur passed in exercise of powers in Clause 6.5 of the U.P. Electricity Supply Code, 2005.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to repay the entire dues determined by the Executive Engineer in the order impugned but the condition put in the order impugned with regard to deposit of entire principal amount of Rs.1,97,830.94 may be relaxed by this Court.

¶9

We may note that the petitioner herein is contesting the dispute relating to electricity bills since 2018 and after various rounds of litigation, finally the determination has been done by the order dated 27.9.2022. The chart appended to the order impugned shows that the provisional bill does not suffer from any error of law. We may further note that the Executive Engineer has already granted relaxation to the petitioner to deposit the total amount of Rs.2,15,135.00/- towards interest in six instalments. The petitioner has to show his bonafide by depositing the principal amount of Rs.1,97,830.94/- as indicated in the order impugned dated 27.9.2022 and the permission to deposit the interest in six instalments is subject to the first deposit towards principal made by the petitioner.

¶10

Taking note of the order impugned and in the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find it a fit case for interference. However, in case of any dispute, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appeal under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

¶11

The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.

¶12

Order Date :- 23.11.2022 Kpy

¶13

Digitally signed by KAVLESHWAR PRASAD YADAV Date: 2022.11.25 15:12:36 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vijay Kumar Agrawal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar Agrawal v. State of U.P. 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

Mahesh Chandra Sahu and 9 Others Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Smt. Brij Rani and Another Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Indra Devi Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Vaibhav Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Puran Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anil Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others