Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 193106 (ALL)

NARAYAN PRASAD GOND v. MANAGING DIRECTOR AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/17522/2025 · 2025-10-09

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 17522 of 2025 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra Advocate holding brief of Sri Narendra Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 3. 2. Petitioner by means of present writ petition has prayed for the following reliefs:- "Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the benefit of compensation to the petitioner. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the electricity department to grant new electricity connection in the premises of the petitioner i.c. 24/12 Master Jahurul Hasan Road, Katra, Pargana and Tehsil Sadar, Prayagraj- 211002. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the electricity department decide the representations dated to 04.02.2025, 21.02.2025, 22.04.2025, 29.04.2025 and 15.05.2025 (Annexure no.5) to this writ petition, within stipulated period which may be fixed by this Hon'ble court." 3. This Court has passed the order on 23.7.2025 in following terms:- "By order dated 3rd July, 2025, there was direction upon supply company. Paragraphs 2 and 3 from the said order is reproduced below. "2. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned advocate holding the brief appears on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 3 and on query submits, his client will inspect the premises to ascertain whether petitioner is in possession of some portion and it is without electricity, or otherwise. 3. Appearing respondents will file report of inspection made in the meantime, for hearing and disposal of the writ petition on adjourned date. Advance copy be served on learned advocate for petitioner." Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Raj Karan Patel Counsel for Respondent(s) : Narendra Kumar Tiwari Narayan Prasad Gond .....Petitioner(s) Managing Director And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Mr. R.K. Mishra, learned advocate holding the brief appears on behalf of the supply company and files a brief of documents. On query he submits, the brief contains report of inspection made on 8th July, 2025. It does not say about whether petitioner is in possession of some portion and it is without electricity, or otherwise. Fresh report on the inspection earlier made be filed on adjourned date, with advance copy served to petitioner's learned advocate. It is made clear that if the omission persists, it will be invitation for direction of cost of further adjournment being paid to petitioner. List on 31st July, 2025 as fresh." 4. Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate, holding brief for Sri Narendra Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3, has filed an affidavit on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3, wherein it has been stated that upon inspection, it was found that there is no electricity connection in the portion of the house where the petitioner is residing. Paragraph 5 of the said affidavit is reproduced below:- "5. That, the Sub Divisional officer conducted the enquiry in compliance to order dated 23-07-2025 of the Hon'ble court passed in C.M.W.P. NO.17522 of 2025. The petitioner was found residing with his wife Smt. Shanti Devi aged about 45 years Son Suraj Gond aged about 18 years and Son Pawan Gond aged about 30 years with daughter in law Smt. Shiwani aged about 25 years in 7 rooms constructed at ground floor inside the gated boundary in house no. 12/24, Master Jahurul Hasan Road, Katra, Pargana/Tehsil-Sadar, District-Prayagraj.They were present at the time of inspection. It is pertinent to mention here that there is no electricity supply on his part of premises. The Copy of the report dated 30-07-2025 submitted by Sub Divisional officer is being filed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE NO.CA-1 to this affidavit." 5. Learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 has not disputed the fact that the petitioner has applied for a new electricity connection. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the above, the electricity connection should be granted expeditiously to the petitioner. 7. In view of the aforesaid statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 3, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent no.3-Junior Engineer, Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Electricity Urban Distribution Division, Myohall, Prayagraj to grant electricity connection to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order if there is no legal impediment. October 10, 2025 Gaurav WRIC No. 17522 of 2025 2 (Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad