Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3030 (UTT)

PAWAN KUMAR KANOUJIA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMS/619/2025 · 2025-03-10

Ravindra Maithani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPMS No. 619 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. S.C. Bhatt, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Bisht, Brief Holder for the State. Mr. Pankaj Chaturvedi, Advocate for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4, through video conferencing. Petitioner claims that he is not being provided drinking water connection by the respondents. Heard and perused the file. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 was required to get instructions. Today, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 has placed written instructions. Let it be placed on record. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 would submit that there is shortage of water and 22 water connections have already been given; Non-domestic connection from the said pipe line has not been given. He would submit that an estimate of Rs. 21.243 lakh has already been forwarded by the Superintending Engineer to the General Manager, Jal Sansthan. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 gives a statement that as soon as the respondent no. 2 takes a decision with regard to release of budget, the respondent no. 4 may take action for providing water connection to the petitioner within a period of three months thereafter. The Court takes on record the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4. With the observations as above, the writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Ravindra Maithani J.) 10.03.2025 Avneet/