Disposed¶9

Rohit Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Nov 2025WRIC/41773/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition (civil), electricity connection denied/inaction; repeated representations ignored; directive/disposal-with-direction remedy; fresh representation with certified copy of order; respondent no.2 Executive Engineer Electricity Distribution Division-I Sadar Basti; decision within one month after hearing counsel; Basti, Uttar Pradesh; decided 26-11-2025; no merits adjudicated; no statute or precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

Directive disposal: petitioner permitted to file a fresh representation with certified copy of the order before respondent no.2 within one month ('within a period of one month from today', para 12); respondent no.2 to consider and decide it in accordance with law after hearing petitioner's counsel within one month of receipt. ¶9

Rohit Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 41773 of 2025

¶3

Rohit Kumar	Versus	.....Petitioner(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Ashutosh : C.S.C., Tripathi	Pandey Shrawan Kumar

¶4

Court No. - 40

¶5

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

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

¶7

The case of the petitioner is that he has submitted a representation before the respondent authority seeking an electricity connection for his shop situated at House No. 2265, Ward No. 6, Mohalla-Malitola, Gandhi Nagar, District-Basti. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent authority is sitting tight over the matter and is not providing the electricity connection to the shop of the petitioner despite repeated representation made by the petitioners.

¶8

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction may be issued to the respondent no.2 to consider the grievance of the petitioner.

¶9

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, Electricity

¶10

WRIC No. 41773 of 2025

¶11

¶12

Distribution Division-I, Sadar Basti, within a period of one month 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 hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner within a period of one month thereafter from the date he receives representation of the petitioner.

¶13

November 26, 2025 Arif

¶14

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

¶15

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rohit Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Arun Kumar Mauya and 11 Others vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Satyam Rai vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 2 Others

Mohit Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Shailendra Kumar vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited and 4 Others