Ajay Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2019 Latest Caselaw 2189 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 32
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10570 of 2019
 

 
Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar Pal
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mahboob Ahmad
 

 
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J.

Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, for the following reliefs:

(i) issue a writ, order or direction to call for record of the order dated 31.12.2018 passed by the respondent no.2, issue a writ of certiorari quashing the same including the consequential impugned notice dated 29.1.2019 issued by respondent no. 3;

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents from creating any interference in respect of functioning of the Pumping-set of petitioner installed for minor irrigation and also direct the respondent no. 3 to ensure the uninterrupted powers of electricity supply to the petitioner against his connection for the said pumping-set;

(iii) issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case;

(iv) award the cost of the writ petition to the petitioner.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order dated 31.12.2018 cancelling the boring certificate as well as consequential notice dated 29.01.2019 qua disconnection of the electricity connection passed/issued by respondent nos. 2 and 3 respectively is in violation of principle of natural justice as the same has been passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

Sri Mahboob Ahmad, Advocate appearing for respondent no. 3 has not disputed the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

In view of above, the order dated 31.12.2019 as well as consequential notice dated 29.1.2019 is hereby quashed with the liberty to respondent no. 2 to pass afresh order after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

With the above observations, writ petition is disposed of.

However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

Order Date :- 1.4.2019

RCT/-