Petitioner challenged a final electricity assessment order and recovery certificate in a writ petition. The court noted an efficacious remedy under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and dismissed the petition with liberty to pursue other permissible remedies.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:83611-DB
Court No. - 2
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10664 of 2024
Petitioner :- Nirmal Kumar Respondent :- Managing Director U.P.P.C.Ltd. Mandhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rama Kant Dixit Counsel for Respondent :- Manish Jauhari,C.S.C.
Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
(Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.)
Order Date :- 13.12.2024 Shanu/-
Digitally signed by :- SHANU SUMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition was maintainable against the final assessment order and consequential recovery certificate under the Electricity Act, given the alternate remedy under Section 127.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nirmal Kumar
Managing Director U.P.P.C. Ltd. Mandhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Lko.
Rajan Roy
Brij Raj Singh
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
