Allahabad High Court
SMT. BIRENDRI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed, with the petitioner free to seek remedy elsewhere.
Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Birendri Devi, applied for an electricity connection to operate a private 10 HP tube well on her agricultural land under a government scheme. She submitted an affidavit, together with co‑sharers of Khasra No. 26, stating that there was no objection to the connection. The added co‑sharers (respondents 5 and 6) contested the affidavit, alleging that it and other co‑sharers' affidavits were forged and that the petitioner had submitted false documents. The Court noted that the dispute was essentially factual and that writ jurisdiction does not permit it to adjudicate such factual controversies. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, leaving the petitioner free to pursue any appropriate remedy in a suitable forum.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to an electricity connection for a private tube well under the scheme in view of the alleged forged affidavits.
- Whether the High Court can entertain and decide factual disputes concerning the authenticity of documents in a writ petition.
Subjects
- electricity connection
- private tube well
- agricultural purpose
- writ jurisdiction
- forged affidavit
- co‑sharers
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 27360 of 2026
Smt. Birendri Devi
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Narendra Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Alok Mishra, C.S.C., Dhruva Dixit
Court No. - 21
HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J.
HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J.
1. Petitioner seeks electricity connection for running private tube well of
10 HP load under the scheme. Mr. Sunil Srivastava, learned advocate
appears on her behalf and Mr. Shubhranshu Shekhar, learned advocate,
Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State. Mr. Anuj Tripathi,
holding the brief appears for respondent nos 2 to 4 (the Supply
Company).
2. Petitioner was given leave to add her co-sharers as respondent nos 5
and 6. They were noticed. Mr. Dhruva Dixit, learned advocate appears on
their behalf. He files counter of date.
3. We have heard submissions at the Bar. Paragraph 9 from the writ
petition is reproduced below.
"9. That petitioner and other co-sharers of khasra no. 26 have filed an
affidavit before the respondents that they have no objection if electricity
connection granted for agriculture purpose. A true copy of an affidavits
filed by petitioner and other co-sharers are being collectively filed
herewith and marked as Annexure No.5 to this writ petition."
Also paragraph 9 from the counter of added respondent nos 5 and 6 is
reproduced below.
"9. That the contents of paragraph 9 stated by Prem Vir Singh are totally
false and have no merit. The respondents no. 5 and 6 are also co sharers
WRIC No. 27360 of 2026
2
in the said land and they have not given any affidavit regarding the issue
of electricity connection. Moreover, the affidavits of other co sharers
namely Mukesh Kumar son of Jugendra Singh, Omkar Singh son of
Dariyal and Ramvati wife of Jugendra Singh had been forged and the
said co sharers have given affidavits stating that they have not given any
affidavit of such kind and the same had been forged without the consent of
the said co sharers. The petitioner has given forged documents on the
basis of which she tried to get electricity connection. A true photocopy of
the affidavits sworn by the co sharers are filed and marked as C.A-2 to
the counter affidavit."
4. We have dispute on facts. We will not be drawn into the controversy in
exercise of writ jurisdiction.
5. The writ petition is dismissed leaving it open to petitioner to find her
remedy.
(Arindam Sinha,J.)
(Prashant Kumar,J.)
September 30, 2026
Anupam S/-
Digitally signed by :-
ANUPAM SINGH PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…