Disposed

Ms Priya Jain v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2024WRIC/21499/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition noting that the electricity connection had been restored. The court directed the Noida Authority to resolve the petitioner's grievances regarding maintenance fees and the sale deed within three weeks, leaving the petitioner free to approach the court again if the grievance remained unaddressed.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to Noida Authority to resolve disputes within three weeks; otherwise petitioner may assail the same.

Ms Priya Jain vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Public Procurement and Tenders | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:125682-DB

¶2

Court No. - 29

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21499 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Ms Priya Jain Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Shankar,Sunil Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kaushalendra Nath Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ajay Shanker, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.C. Upadhyay, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents, Sri Kaushlendra Nath Singh, learned Counsel for Noida Authority and perused the record.

¶7

Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:-

¶8

"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to constitute a committee as per Government Policy for resolving the dispute pertaining to the maintenance fee of the premises in question and further for execution of the sale deed in favour of the petitioner and handover the maintenance account to the RWA i.e. "Bhutani Alphathum Officer Owners Welfare Association".

¶9

II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to disconnect the electricity of the premises, subject to the payment of regular electricity charges as and when demanded by the electricity department.

¶10

III. Directing the respondents to maintain a separate account pertaining to the corpus money and the maintenance fee and get the same audited regularly by a Chartered Accountant; and the same may be handed over to the RWE of Tower 'A', 'B' and 'C' along with the certificate of the Accountant at the time to the handover."

¶11

When the matter was taken up on 08.07.2024, this Court has passed the following order:-

¶12

"1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner purchased a unit in the Alphathum project, Noida, from Parmesh Construction Company Ltd. after paying the full consideration and received a "No Dues Certificate." Despite this, the petitioner faced intermittent electric disconnections and further the sale deed and tri-partite agreement with the maintenance agency is not being executed after determining a uniform rate for charging the maintenance fee. After being invoiced for maintenance charges, the petitioner sought help from the Noida Authority and police due to harassment from the builder and maintenance team. The police refused to register an FIR, prompting the petitioner to send a complaint via speed post but the Noida Authority has not taken any cognizance whereas similarly situated authority i.e. Greater Noida Authority had constituted a committee addressing similar issues.

¶13

Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no.1.

¶14

Issue notice to the respondent nos.2 and 3 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week.

¶15

Meanwhile, the parties may exchange their affidavits.

¶16

Put up this matter as fresh on 05-08-2024.

¶17

Meanwhile, the Chief Executive Officer may decide the objection of the petitioner in accordance with rules. It is also expected that the electricity connection may also be restored subject to payment of outstanding electricity dues."

¶18

In response to the order dated 08.07.2024, Sri Kaushlendra Nath Singh, learned Counsel for Noida Authority on instructions states that the electricity has already been restored in the unit of the petitoner and the authority has already directed the builder as well as the petitioner for resolving this dispute and today is the date fixed.

¶19

Considering the factual situation, at this stage, we are not inclined to proceed further in the matter. Needless to say, grievance of the petitioner must be addressed by the authority in accordance with law within a period of next three weeks and if the same is not addressed, needless to say, the petitioner will have the right to assail the same.

¶20

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed off.

¶21

Order Date :- 5.8.2024 S.P.

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ms Priya Jain v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms Priya Jain 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anamika Devi @ Rani and 4 Others vs State of Up and 2 Others

Smt Urmila Devi vs State of Up and 7 Others

Jahanara @ Jahanara Ahmed vs State of Up and 3 Others

Parvin Khan vs State of Up and 3 Others

Committee of Management Sri Surya Narayan Purva Madhyamik Vidyalaya vs Avneesh Kumar Rai and 2 Others

Smt Priyanka Dubey vs State of Up and 2 Others