Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 172610 (ALL)

RAMESH CHANDRA YADAV v. MANAGING DIRECTOR, PURVANCHAL ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CORPORATION VARANASI AND 2 OTHERS

WRIC/36691/2025 · 2025-10-27

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 36691 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J. HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Udit Chandra, learned counsel for respondents. 2. Present petition has been filed seeking following relief:- "A). Issue, a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing to respondents to restrain to the respondents from span of the Electricity wire over the roof/house of petitioner. B. Issue, a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing to respondent to decide the representation of the petitioner and till then not span the wire over the roof/house of the petitioner." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for redressal of his grievance, petitioner has filed representation before respondent No.2, but no decision has been taken till date. Lastly, it is submitted that a direction may be issued to respondent No. 2 to decide the representation within a stipulated time. 4. Learned counsel for respondents submitted that petitioner may be directed to file fresh representation. Further, in case any such representation is filed, the same shall be considered and decided at the earliest. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kailash Nath Counsel for Respondent(s) : Udit Chandra Ramesh Chandra Yadav .....Petitioner(s) Managing Director, Purvanchal Electricity Distribution Corporation Varanasi And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) disposed of with liberty to petitioner to move fresh representation along with certified copy of this order before respondent No.2-Executive Engineer (Distribution) Region 2nd, Jaunpur within two weeks from today. In case any such representation is filed, respondent No. 2 is directed to decide the same in accordance with law maximum within a period of three weeks thereafter. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the case on merits. It is upon respondent No.2 to pass order after considering the relevant Rules as well as facts of the case. October 28, 2025 Nitendra WRIC No. 36691 of 2025 2 (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITENDRA TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad