Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

SMT. SAVITRI DEVIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 4 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The petition is disposed, with the petitioner directed to file a fresh representation and the respondent ordered to decide it within one month.

Summary

Smt. Savitri Devi filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the removal of 33 KV and 11 KV electricity cables from her land in Babhnauli, Kushinagar, and ordering the Executive Engineer to decide a representation she had filed on 30‑12‑2025. The petitioner alleged that no decision had been taken on her representation. The respondents argued that keeping the petition pending would serve no useful purpose and suggested that the grievance be considered. The High Court, without addressing the merits, disposed of the petition and directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation, attaching a certified copy of the order, within one month. The Court further ordered the Executive Engineer to consider and decide the new representation within one month of receipt.

Issues considered

  • Whether the court should issue a mandamus directing removal of the electricity cables from the petitioner's land
  • Whether the respondent is obligated to decide the petitioner's representation within a stipulated period

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • mandamus
  • electricity cable
  • representation
  • administrative law
  • procedural direction
  • High Court

Judgment

           HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                             WRIT - C No. - 10385 of 2026

Smt. Savitri Devi
                                                                      .....Petitioner(s)
                                          Versus

State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others
                                                                   .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)             : Ashok Kumar Upadhyay, Varun Kumar
                                        Chaubey
Counsel for Respondent(s)             : C.S.C., Rishu Mishra

Court No. - 40
                   HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.
                   HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for
the State-respondents

2. Petitioner by means of this petition has prayed for following reliefs:

"I. To, issue a writ, order or direction in the nature mandamus commanding the
respondent nos. 4 and 5 to remove the electricity cable of 33 K.V. and 11 K.V. from
the land of the petitioner situate at village Babhnauli, District Kushinagar.

II. To, issue a writ, order or direction in the nature mandamus direct the respondent
no. 4 to decide the representation dated 30.12.2025 (Annexure No. 4 to the writ
petition) of the petitioner within stipulated period."


3. It is submitted that in the above regard petitioner has moved
representation dated 30.12.2025 before the Executive Engineer, Electricity
Distribution Division Tamkuhi Road Sewrahi, District Kushinagar-
respondent no. 4, however, no decision has been taken on the representation
so moved by the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that no useful purpose would
be served in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction may
be issued to the respondent no.4 to consider the grievance of the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without adverting
into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed off permitting the
                                                                                               WRIC No. 10385 of 2026
                                                                     2


                                    petitioners to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of this order
                                    raising all grievances before the respondent no.4-Executive Engineer,
                                    Electricity   Distribution   Division   Tamkuhi     Road     Sewrahi,    District
                                    Kushinagar, within a period of one month from today. In case, any such
                                    representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent no.4 shall consider
                                    and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of one month
                                    thereafter from the date he receives representation of the petitioner.



                                                                 (Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    Arif




Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD ARIF
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.