Petitioner challenged a notice regarding an agreement renewal and argued lack of maintainability due to prior notices. The court disposed of the petition conditionally, directing the petitioner to file objections if proceedings continue, with the matter to be finalized within six weeks.
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. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36380 of 2022 Petitioner :- Raju Rajan Agrawal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ganesh,Rupa Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Naresh Chandra Nishad
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent no.1 and Sri Naresh Chandra Nishad, learned counsel for respondent no.2.
By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned notice dated 08.9.2022 issued by the Executive Engineer, Electricity Maintenance Division-Vth, U.P. Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd., Anpara, District Sonebhadra (respondent No.2). Further request is made to issue direction to the respondent no.2 to renew the agreement in the name of petitioner for the shop no.15 situated at Anpara Thermal Project Shopping Complex Anpara, Sonebhadra.
Learned counsel for the respondent has raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present writ petition on the ground that three notices were issued to the petitioner on 03.7.2012, 21.12.2020, and 27.8.2022 to which he did not submit any reply/objection. Consequently, the impugned last notice was given to the petitioner on 08.9.2022 to file his objection but instead of filing the objection, straightaway he has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, which is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed.
No useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending.
In the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of finally with observation that in case the proceeding is not finalized, the petitioner is to file objection/response to the said notice within a week's time from today and the proceeding would be finalized in further six weeks.
Order Date :- 22.2.2023 RKP
Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Raju Rajan Agrawal
State of U.P.
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
