Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr. Mukesh Bhargava, Authorised Signatory. VERSUS ^t^- ..^^" •<^ ^^ RESPONDENTS:
1. STATE OF CHHAmSGARH through its Secretary, Department of Energy, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.)
2. Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency having its Registered Office at: 2nd Floor, CSERC Building, Shanti Nagar, Raipur (C.G).
3. National Load Dispatch Centre Power System Operation (NLDC), Corporation Itd. having its Registered Office at: B-9, Qutab Institutional - Area, Katwaria Sarai, New Delhi 110016
4. CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR, Govfr;.-of Chhattisgarh, 36/437, ^ Floor. Byron Bazar, Raipur (C.G.). 1st
2. T WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 QFTHE CONSITUTION OF INDIA FOR THE ISSUANCE OF WRITS IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, CERTIORARI ETC. AND/OR FOR ^IRECTIQiKSl AND/OR FOR ORDERISt IN THE NATURE OF WRITS TO PROVIDE ACCREDITATIQN_ AND REGISTRATION TO THE PETITIONER'S 8MW POWER PLANT AT SIRGim FOR THE PERIOD BEGINNING FROM
09.10.2011 AND REC HlGHCOUmWCHHaTTiSQARH : HLASPUR WRIT PETiTiON (C) N0. 213 OF 2012 PET!T!ON£R m/s. Vandana Vldhvut Limited RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisciarh & Others Versus r;t Petsison under tjcte 228 of the Constitution of India) Singie Bench : Hon'bte Shri Satish K. Aanihotri, J. Present:- Shri P.S.Koshy with Shri Vaibhav Shukla, Advocales for ths petittonei'. Shri V.V.S.rvlurth", Dv. Advocate Genera! for the State. ORDER (Passsd on this 10^ day of February, 2012)
Learned counsel aDpearing for the Detltioner submits that the Detitioner does not want to press other rslsef except for the respondent No.2 be directed to conssder the representat'on dated 11.11-2011 (Annexure P-16) for grant of Accreditation Certificate w.e.f. 09.10.2011 .
Shri Murthv, leamed Dv. Advocate General apDearina fbr the State/ respondents No. 1 & 2 submits that fhe pendina represenfation shaV be considered and decided, in accordance with iaw on ;ts own rrierit, as expeditiousiy as possibie, preferabiy within a period offourweexs.
in vie'A' of the above submissfon, accordinc! lo jearned counsei for the petitsoner, nothing survives for adjudis^tio" at this stafle.
Accordinalv, the writ oetition is disposed o[.. Sd/- Siitish K. Agnihotri Judge 3£il3K
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.