Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21398-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3537 of 2025 Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Revenue Lko And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhupendra Prakash,Dinesh Kumar Pal,Manish Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Aprajita Bansal Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J. 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition bearing Writ C No.2898 of 2025 which was disposed of on 26.03.2025 in the following terms:- "1. Heard. 2. Ms. Aprajita Bansal, learned Counsel for the Electricity Corporation says that though the demand notice/recovery citation has been challenged there are assessment orders which have been passed but are not under challenge. The said orders and receipt of notice under Section 3 of the U.P. Government Electrical Undertakings (Dues Recovery) Act, 1958 have been provided to learned Counsel for the petitioner today in Court by her. 3. In view of the above, the petitioner may avail the prescribed remedies now that he has been provided a copy of the said documents. 4. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of." 3. Apparently, the petitioner was granted liberty to avail the prescribed remedies against the assessment orders and recovery notice. The assessment orders are appealable under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The notice for recovery is consequential to the assessment orders. Instead of availing the said remedy, this second writ petition has been filed. The writ petition is misconceived and is not maintainable. 4. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is dismissed. 5. It is open for the petitioner to press for interim relief in the appeal, if any, filed under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 including against the recovery proceedings. (Om Prakash Shukla, J.) (Rajan Roy, J.) Order Date :- 16.4.2025 -Piyush- Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench