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

2018 Supreme(Online)(All) 49

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Not mentioned, J
Vandana Bansal (Dr. ) v. State of U. P. and Others


1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 04 December 2017 passed by District Magistrate. The case of the petitioner is that petitioner is the owner - in - possession and recorded tenure holder having valid title over the certain piece of land, whose khata numbers are also mentioned in para 2 of the writ petition. The case of the petitioner is that Power Grid Corporation of India and U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. are proposing to erect the electric poles over the petitioner's several plots without informing or taking her permission and also without following the procedure prescribed under relevant provisions of the Electricity Act , 2003 (hereafter referred to as 'Act 2003'), the Indian Telegraph Act , 1885 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act 1885') and Works of Licensees Rules , 2006 (hereinafter referred to as 'R.2006'). For redressal of her grievance, the petitioner has submitted an application dated 25 May 2017 before District Magistrate, Allahabad. When no action was taken, she had also filed several reminders and ultimately, she had no option but to file Writ Petition No. 36254 of 2017 (Dr. Vandana Bansal Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others). Wri

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