SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1952 Supreme(Raj) 108

WANCHOO, BAPNA
Surajmal – Appellant
Versus
Rajasthan State – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
U.M. Trivedi, for Applicant; Murli Manohar, for State

Wanchoo, C.J.—This is an application under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India by Surajmal owner of firm Badichand Bachhraj of Pratap-garh praying for a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate direction against the Rajasthan State as the case may require.

2. The application in this case was made on the 6th of September, 1951. The applicant is the licensee of the Power House at Pratapgarh. He increased the rates of supply of electricity for domestic and industrial consumers from the 1st of May, 1951. The Government of Rajasthan however, did not approve of this increase in rates and tried to persuade the applicant to continue charging the old rates till such time as the Government appointed rating committee. The applicant, however, refused to agree to this on the ground that this Would ruin his financial condition. Thereupon, on the 29th of August, 1951, the State of Rajasthan served an order which is said to have been passed under sec. 33 of the Rajasthan Public Security Ordinance. 1949 (Ordinance No. XXVI of 1949). By this order the applicant was directed to carry on the working of the Power House at Pratapgarh until further order and to abstain from closing the same and from r


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top