The court emphasized the imposition and awarding of costs in litigation and the principle that compensation must be awarded to those forced into litigation.

AMRESHWAR PRATAP SAHI, RAJIV LOCHAN MEHROTRA, JJ.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3.

2. After having heard the matter on 15th September, 2017, we had passed the following order:-

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Prima-facie we find the third respondent has virtually committed contempt of the judgment and order dated 01.09.2016.

However, Sri Chandra Agarwal prays for three days' time to seek instructions and inform the Court about the correct status of the procedure adopted for any such recovery after the judgment dated 01.09.2016.

Let the instructions be completed by Monday.

Put up on Monday (18.09.2017)."

3. We have also perused the judgment delivered on 1st September, 2016 in this matter, copy whereof has been filed as Annexure No. 5 to the writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3 submits that there was a miscommunication with regard to the said judgment as a result whereof recovery proceedings have been again pressed into service against the petitioner and in order to rectify the same the Executive Engineer has issued a letter on 16th September, 2017. A photo state copy whereof has been placed before the Court whereby a request has been made to the Additional District Magistrate Finance and Revenue, Hapur to withdraw the recovery proceedings.

5. In order to put the record straight, we hereby quote the letter issued by the Executive Engineer in this order:-

i=kad 2402 foŒfoŒ[kaŒ@x<+

fnukad % 16-09-2017

fo"k;%& Jh vkse Ádk'k iq= Jh ckydjke fuoklh xzke f[kyokbZ MkŒ [kkl rglhy x<+eqDrs'oj ftyk&gkiqM+ dh /kkjk&5 okil djus ds lEcU/k esaA

vij ftykf/kdkjh

for ,oe~ jktLo]

gkiqM+A

egksn;]

mijksDr fo"k; vkidk lknj voxr djkuk gS fd Jh vkse Ádk'k iq= Jh ckydjke fuoklh xzke f[kyokbZ dks fn;s /kkjk&3 ds uksfVl 8815 fnukad 14-01-2016 ds lkis{k /kkjk 5 i= la[;k 169 o lkbZV ij QhM+ uaŒ 3000157 [k.M+ dk;kZy; ds i=kad 4133 fnukad 04-01-2017 :i;s 2]13]404-00 dh Ásf"kr dh xbZ FkhA

mDr lEcU/k ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; bykgkckn esa ckn fjV lh uaŒ 14691 vkWQ 2016 ;ksftr gSA ftlesa ekuuh; U;k;ky; bykgkckn }kjk fn;s vkns'k fnuakd 01-09-2016 ÁkIr u gksus ds vHkko esa Jh vkse Ádk'k dh xbZ FkhA

vr% vkils vuqjks/k gS fd vki mDr miHkksDrk Jh vkse Ádk'k iq= Jh ckydjke fuoklh xzke f[kyokbZ dh /kkjk&5 ds uksfVl i= uaŒ 169 o lkbZV ij QhM+ uaŒ 3000157 [k.M dk;kZy; ds i=kad 4133 fnukad 04-01-2017 :i;s 2]13]404-00 dks okfil djus dh d`ik djsaA

layXu% ;FkkijksDr

Áoh.k vxzoky

vf/k'kklh vfHk;Urk

fnukad % 16-09-2017

i=kad 2402 foŒfoŒ[kaŒ@x<+

Áfrfyfi mi&ftykf/kdkjh x<+eqDrs'oj dks lwpukFkZ ,oa vko';d dk;Zokgh gsrq Ásf"kr gSA

Áoh.k vxzoky

vf/k'kklh vfHk;UrkA

6. This being the position, the recovery certificate has been erroneously issued and which amounts to a clear harassment of the petitioner who had to undertake this compulsory litigation on account of the slackness on the part of the respondents in not having complied with the judgment and direction dated 1st September, 2016.

7. The neglect of the respondents calls for award of costs as well on the respondent-Electricity Department. The petitioner was given an unfair treatment and is accordingly entitled to costs in view of the ratio of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Jagdev Singh v. State of U.P. 2014 (8) ADJ 700, in paragraph nos. 19 to 23 extracted here-in-under:

"19. Chapter XXI, Rule 11 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 prescribes the award of costs, which reads as under:-

"11. Costs.---In disposing of an application under this Chapter the Court may make such order as to costs as it may consider just.

1. Costs--Imposition of.--it is apparent that non-payment of cost is an exemption for which special reasons have to be given by the Court. The cost imposed should be in accordance with rules and if the proceedings are unnecessarily protracted or adjournments have been sought it is upon the discretion of the Judge to impose exemplary cost taking also into account the circumstances etc. for the purpose of adj