Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13192 (CHH)

KRISHNA KUMAR GHORE v. CHHATTISGARH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

WPC/1131/2019 · 2025-01-23

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:4282 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1131 of 2019 Krishna Kumar Ghore S/o Late Shri H.L. Ghore Aged About 61 Years R/o Nariyal Kothi, Dayalband, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgrah., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board Through Chairman Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. The Executive Engineer (City Division) Chhattisgarh Electricity Board, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Shikhar Agnihotri, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Raja Sharma, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 23/01/2025 1) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner moved an application before respondent authorities to shift the High Voltage 11KV electricity circulation line away from his house to other suitable place. He further submits that application was moved on 20.04.2014, thereafter, a legal notice was sent in the year 2018, but no decision has been taken till date. 2) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents submits that application of petitioner was received in the 2 year 2018 and same was forwarded for survey, following which an estimate was prepared on 17.08.2019 which was valid for Financial Year 2018-19. He further submits that petitioner failed to deposit the estimated cost and the estimate got lapsed by efflux of time. 3) Heard. 4) Evidently, an application was moved by the petitioner for shifting the High Voltage 11KV electricity circulation line in the year 2018, pursuant to which respondents conducted survey and prepared an estimate which remained active during Financial Year 2018-19. Petitioner was communicated but he did not pay the requisite amount and the estimate got lapsed. 5) Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, instant petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favor of petitioner to move a fresh application before the respondent authorities, who in turn are directed to take appropriate steps at the earliest, strictly in accordance with law. 6) Accordingly, instant writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Ajinkya