Allahabad High Court
RAMCHANDRAversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The amendment application was dismissed for procedural non‑compliance and the writ petition was disposed of, directing the respondent to consider the petitioner’s reply and stay any coercive action.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash a recovery citation dated 10‑07‑2026 and an amendment application to quash a final assessment order dated 5‑02‑2026, alleging that the final order was passed without considering a reply filed on 10‑06‑2025. The amendment application was rejected because the supporting affidavit did not comply with the procedural requirements prescribed by law. The court, after hearing counsel for both sides, directed the Executive Engineer of the electricity department to consider the petitioner’s reply within three weeks and to decide strictly in accordance with law. It also ordered that no coercive action be taken against the petitioner pending the final decision. The writ petition was thereby disposed of with these directions.
Issues considered
- Whether the amendment application to quash the final assessment order is maintainable despite procedural deficiencies in the supporting affidavit.
- Whether the writ petition seeking quash of the recovery citation is maintainable.
- Whether the authority must consider the petitioner’s reply filed on 10‑06‑2025 before finalizing the assessment.
Subjects
- writ petition
- assessment order
- recovery citation
- procedural compliance
- electricity department
- stay of coercive action
- final assessment
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 36189 of 2026
Ramchandra
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Up And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dipendra Kumar, Pradeep Kumar Rai
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Chetan Chatterjee
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.
Re. Civil Misc. Amendment Application No.2 of 2026.
1. The present amendment application has been filed supported by an
affidavit with the prayer to quash the final assessment order dated
5.2.2026 which has been wrongly mentioned as 5.2.2021.
2. While going through the affidavit filed in support of amendment
application, it transpires that the same has not been drafted as per the
procedure prescribed in law.
3. The amendment application is rejected.
Order on writ petition.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Chetan Chatterjee, learned
counsel for the Electricity Department and learned Standing Counsel for
the State-Respondents.
2. The Present writ petition has been filed, inter-alia, with the prayer to
quash the recovery citation dated 10.07.2026 issued by the respondent
no.4 namely Tehsildar, Tehsil Ghosi, District Mau.
3. It is argued that against the provisional assessment order dated
26.5.2025, reply was submitted by the petitioner on 10.6.2025 but without
considering the same, final assessment order has been passed on 5.2.2026.
4. In this view of the matter and with the consent of the counsel for the
parties, we dispose of the present writ petition directing the respondent
no.3 namely Executive Engineer, Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam
Khand-2 Kopaganj, Mau to consider the reply submitted by the petitioner
dated 10.6.2025 within a period of three weeks from today, copy of which
is appended as annexure no.3 to the writ petition and take a final decision
WRIC No. 36189 of 2026
2
strictly in accordance with law.
5. Till the time decision is taken, no coercive action shall be taken against
the petitioner pursuant to the recovery citation dated 10.7.2026 subject to
the final outcome in the matter.
(Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.)
September 17, 2026
Gaurav Kuls
Digitally signed by :-
GAURAV KULSHRESTHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…