Dinesh Kumar Shukla vs Electricity Service ...
2018 Latest Caselaw 786 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 23
 
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 14740 of 2018
 
Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Shukla
 
Respondent :- Electricity Service Commission,U.P.P.C.L. Thru.Chairman &Ors
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vidhu Bhushan Kalia,Ganesh Dutt Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.S.G.,Subhash Vidharthi,Vikrant Raghuvanshi
 

 
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

Heard Sri Vidhu Bhushan Kalia, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Notices for opposite party Nos.1 and 2 have been accepted by Sri Subhash Vidyarthi, Advocate. Smt. Seema Srivastava, Advocate has filed memo of appearance on behalf of opposite party No.3, the same is taken on record and notices for opposite party Nos.4, 5 & 6 have been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel, whereas Sri Vikrant Raghuvanshi, Advocate has put in appearance for opposite party No.7.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed application for amendment in the writ petition, the same is taken on record.

Since the counsel(s) for the opposite parties have no objection if this application is allowed, therefore, the amendment application is allowed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to carry out necessary amendments within three working days.

Let counter affidavits be filed by the opposite parties within a period of four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter.

List immediately after expiry of the aforesaid period.

Order Date :- 22.5.2018

Suresh/

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]