Disposed

Sahebe Alam v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2023WRIC/2314/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging a recovery certificate for an electricity bill was disposed of. The court noted that since the authority had withdrawn the recovery proceedings and the demand notice, the cause of action no longer survives, making further proceedings unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner was given liberty to proceed with strict adherence to law; no specific stay or decree was granted as proceedings were withdrawn.

Sahebe Alam Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Consumer Protection | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2314 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Sahebe Alam Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Prasad Maurya,Shivakant Tripathi,Smt. Mithlesh Kumari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Narendra Kumar Tiwari

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Birendra Prasad Maurya, learned counsel for petitioner and Shri N.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam.

¶6

The present writ petition has been preferred questioning the validity of impugned Recovery Certificate (R.C.) Prapatra-36 of Rs.1,79,621/- electricity bill and other charges issued by the Tehsildar, Tehsil Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi and direct the respondent no.3 concerned electricity department to provide amended bill to the petitioner by re-calculating the electricity bill dated 27.09.2022 of Rs.1,39,622/- being letter no.6675 issued by Executive Engineer, Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Kaushambi and further direct the respondent no.3 to compound the Case Crime no.581 of 2022 in P.S. Anti Power Theft Bharvari, District Kaushambi under Section 135 Indian Electricity Act against the petitioner.

¶7

The matter was taken up on 24.01.2023. On the said date, the Coordinate Bench of this Court has asked learned counsel for the respondent to seek instructions in the matter and the recovery in pursuance of the impugned bill was stayed.

¶8

Today when the matter is taken up, Shri N.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam has placed the instruction 07.02.2023 sent by Executive Engineer- respondent no.3, whereby, he has written a letter to the Additional District Officer (F/R), Kaushambi indicating therein that the demand notice no.7830 dated 03.11.2022 is already withdrawn. The said instruction is taken on record.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, once the Authority has already withdrawn the recovery proceeding, we are not at all inclined to proceed further in the matter, as the cause of

¶10

action does not survive. Suffice to indicate that the Authority would be at liberty to proceed strictly in accordance with law as per the procedure contemplates under Clause 6.8 and 8.1 of the Electricity Supply Code 2005.

¶11

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of .

¶12

Order Date :- 13.2.2023 A. Pandey

¶13

Digitally signed by :- ANAND PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sahebe Alam v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahebe Alam 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

Pradeep Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. through its Secretary (Revenue)

Pramod Kumar Vs State of Up. and 5 Others

Devi Prasad Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dhanraj Singh Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Amar Nath Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Swatantra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others