Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
S. Harkauli and Rakesh Tiwari, JJ.
NARAIN ENGINEERING - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. - Respondents
C. M. W. P. 23728 Of 2002
Decided On : 06/13/2002
Permanent Disconnection - Consumer Rights - The court directed the respondents to collect statistics of pending disconnection applications and mandated immediate permanent disconnection within three days upon request by the consumer, without requiring payment of disconnection charges upfront.
Fact of the Case:
The consumers applied for permanent disconnection, but the respondents did not disconnect the electricity and continued billing, citing non-payment of disconnection charges.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondents to provide statistics of pending disconnection applications and mandated immediate permanent disconnection within three days upon request by the consumer, without requiring payment of disconnection charges upfront. The court also ordered no recovery from the petitioner for the period subsequent to the application for permanent disconnection.
Issues: Non-disconnection despite consumer's request, non-payment of disconnection charges, continued billing, and recovery of charges.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the consumer's right to permanent disconnection and directed the respondents to take immediate action without requiring upfront payment of disconnection charges.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to collect statistics of pending disconnection applications, mandated immediate permanent disconnection within three days upon request by the consumer, and ordered no recovery from the petitioner for the period subsequent to the application for permanent disconnection.
( 1 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the-parties.
( 2 ) WE have been noticing from a large number of cases that the consumers have applied for permanent disconnection to the respondents and the respondents have not made permanent disconnection on the excuse that the permanent disconnection charges have not been deposited, although the consumers do not require the electricity, but for some months they are harassing them by continuing future billing.
( 3 ) IN the circumstances, we direct the respondents to collect the statistics of U. P. and file the same before us by way of counter-affidavit mentioning therein as to how many disconnection applications are pending for more than one month in the past one year. They will also state in the counter-affidavit why a mandamus should not be issued with immediate demand of permanent disconnection by any consumer, permanent disconnection must be done within three days by the officers of the department and any permanent dis-connection charges along with any balance amount of bill may be realised from the consumers in due course.
( 4 ) COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT may be filed within six weeks. List before us on 9th of August, 2002.
( 5 ) IN this particular case, no recovery will be made from the petitioner for the period subsequent to February, 1999, when the petitioner had applied for permanent disconnection.
.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
