Single-judge order disposing of a writ petition. Held that the petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy under Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003. Petition disposed of with liberty reserved and contents left open.
Petition disposed of with liberty reserved; all rights and contentions left open.
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.
$~58
GAURAV GUPTA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Kshitiz Mahipal, and Ms. Khairun Nisa, Advs.
versus
BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr.Manish Srivastava with Mr.Santosh Ramdurg, Advs for BSES.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMARKAURAV O R D E R % 09.08.2024
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J
AUGUST 9, 2024/MJ
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/08/2024 at 11:50:08
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy under Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003 before approaching the High Court.
Whether the petition should be disposed of without reserving liberty as the petitioner has an alternate remedy.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gaurav Gupta
BSES Yamuna Power Limited
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
