Barat Kumar Lakhmani vs U.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission Lucknow and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Barat Kumar Lakhmani vs U.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission Lucknow and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of the order raising all grievances before respondent No.2-Executive Engineer, EUDD, Kalyani Devi, 1 Kamla Nehru Road, Prayagraj within fifteen days; respondent No.2 to consider and decide it in accordance with law after providing proper opportunity of hearing within one month of receipt.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent no.2 should be directed by mandamus to give the petitioner a new electricity connection on the basis of the OK Connection Feasibility Status Report given by the SDO and JE (Annexure no.2). +1 more

Court's answer

Without adverting into the merits of the case, the Court disposed of the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of this order raising all his grievances before the respondent No.2-Executive Engineer, EUDD, Kalyani Devi, 1 Kamla Nehru Road, Prayagraj, within fifteen days.

Ratio / Principle

In case such a representation is filed by the petitioner, respondent no.2 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of one month thereafter from the date of receipt of the representation.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, WRIT - C No. - 12637 of 2025 (decided November 13, 2025; Hon'ble Saral Srivastava, J. and Hon'ble Sudhanshu Chauhan, J.) — Barat Kumar Lakhmani v. U.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission Lucknow And Another. Petitioner sought mandamus directing respondent no.2 to give him a new electricity connection on the strength of the OK Connection Feasibility Status Report given by the SDO and JE (Annexure no.2) and to release the connection, alleging that his repeated representations to respondent no.2 were not being heeded. Counsel for the respondents-electricity department submitted that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending. Without adverting into the merits, the Court disposed of the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of the order raising all his grievances before respondent no.2-Executive Engineer, EUDD, Kalyani Devi, 1 Kamla Nehru Road, Prayagraj within fifteen days, and directing respondent no.2 to consider and decide it in accordance with law after providing proper opportunity of hearing within one month of receipt of the representation. No statutory provision or precedent was cited; the disposal was purely procedural and merits were expressly left unexamined.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - C No. - 12637 of 2025

Barat Kumar Lakhmani

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

U.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission Lucknow And Another

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Mohd Ahmad Ansari
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Ajay Singh, Narendra Kumar Tiwari

Court No. - 40

HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, and Shri Narendra Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1 and 2.

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

"(a). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus, commanding upon the respondent no.2 to give the new electricity connection after giving the OK Connection Feasibility Status Report given by the SDO and JE being Annexure no.2 in favour of petitioner.

(b). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus, commanding upon the respondent no.2 to release the new electricity connection in favour of petitioner.

(c). Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper considering the circumstances of the case.

(d). Award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner."

It is stated that the petitioner has submitted several representations to the respondent No.2 to consider his grievances but the respondent No.2 is not paying any heed to it.

Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the respondents-electricity department submit that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction may be issued to the respondent No.2-Executive Engineer, EUDD, Kalyani Devi, 1

WRIC No. 12637 of 2025

2

Kamla Nehru Road, Prayagraj to consider the grievance of the petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without adverting into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed off permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of this order raising all his grievances before the respondent No.2-Executive Engineer, EUDD, Kalyani Devi, 1 Kamla Nehru Road, Prayagraj, within a period of fifteen days from today. In case, any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent No.2, shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of one month, thereafter from the date he receives the representation.

November 13, 2025 Prajapati RK

(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)

Digitally signed by :- RAMKESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad