Posted On by &filed under Allahabad High Court, High Court.


Allahabad High Court
Kisan Sahkari Chinni Mill … vs Managing Director, Madhyanchal … on 6 August, 2010
Court No. - 27

Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 5596 of 2010

Petitioner :- Kisan Sahkari Chinni Mill Puranpur Pilibhit
Respondent :- Managing Director, Madhyanchal Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.
Petitioner Counsel :- Pushjkar Baghel
Respondent Counsel :- Kapil Mishra

Hon'ble Devi Prasad Singh,J.

Hon’ble Anil Kumar,J.

Being aggrieved with the recovery/demand notice as well as tariff charged by
the respondents, petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.

It has been admitted by Shri Kapil Mishra learned counsel appears on behalf
of the respondents that controversy may be adjudicated by the U.P. State
Regulatory Commission.

Accordingly, liberty is given to the petitioner to represent his cause before the
U.P. State Regulatory Commission within a period of one month. In case,
such representation is submitted, State Regulatory Commission shall consider
the same in accordance with law and decide the issue expeditiously and
preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this order.

For the period of four months or till disposal of adjudication of controversy by
State Regulatory Commission, status quo as exists today shall be maintained.

Subject to above, writ petition is disposed of finally.

Order Date :- 6.8.2010
Madhu


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

8 queries in 0.185 seconds.