Allahabad High Court
MOHAMMAD KALIMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court ordered the Chief Engineer to consider the petitioner's representation and decide within two weeks, thereby disposing of the writ petition.
Summary
Petitioner Mohammad Kalim filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Chief Engineer (respondent No.3) to pass an order on his application dated 15 June 2026 and to correct the demand load and erroneous billing of his electricity account. The petition alleged wrong billing and demanded corrective action. The Court examined the prayer and, after hearing counsel for both sides, directed the Chief Engineer to consider the representation and communicate a decision within two weeks of receiving the certified copy of the order. No substantive reasoning on merits was provided beyond procedural compliance. The writ petition was disposed with the said direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the Chief Engineer to pass an order correcting the demand load and billing of the petitioner's electricity account.
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- electricity billing
- demand load correction
- administrative law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 30240 of 2026
Mohammad Kalim
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rafiuddin Ansari
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Narendra Kumar Tiwari
Court No. - 21
HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J.
HON'BLE SATYA VEER SINGH, J.
1. Mr. Rafiuddin Ansari, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner.
Prayer 'A' in the petition is reproduced below.
"(A) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding the answering respondent no. No. 3 to pass an appropriate
order on the application of the petitioner dated 15.06.2026 and correct
the demand load and wrong billing of Account No. 7622-353-482 within a
specified time bound period as directed by this Hon'ble Court."
On query he submits, his client's follow up representation dated 15th
June, 2026 is at page-27. There be direction upon respondent no. 3 (the
Chief Engineer) to, inter alia, correct the load.
2. Mr. S.C. Upadhyay, learned advocate, Standing Counsel appears for
State-respondents. Mr. R.K. Mishra, learned advocate holding the brief
appears for respondent nos. 2 to 4 (the supply company). On query he
submits, some time be given to the Chief Engineer to consider and take
decision on petitioner's representation.
3. Respondent no. 3 (the Chief Engineer) is directed to consider
petitioner's representation dated 15th June, 2026. Petitioner will
communicate certified copy of this order along with copy of the
representation to said respondent. Decision taken be informed to
petitioner within two weeks of the communication.
WRIC No. 30240 of 2026
2
4. The writ petition is disposed of.
(Arindam Sinha,J.)
(Satya Veer Singh,J.)
September 11, 2026
Shiraz
Digitally signed by :-
SHIRAZ ALI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…