Andhra Pradesh High Court · 2004
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Electricity Act, 2003 s. 26(6)
Judgment
Cause title
M/s Haq & Brothers Ice Plant, rep by its proprietor Ms.Jameela Begum w/o M.A.Khaliq, R/o 7-122/1/78, Cental Bank Colony, S.C.No.893, LT CAt-III, Mansoorabad R.R.District AND .... PETITIONER
1 The Chief General Manager, Electry Operation, Hydrabad Zone, APCPDCL, Mint Compound, Hyderabad 2 Assistant Accounts Officer, ERO, Saroornagar, RAnga Reddy District ....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction one in the nature of writ of certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the file No.Lr.CGM/AHZ/HYD/SMRT/D.NO.534/2003 dated 22-11-2003 in respect of the proceedings of the Chief General Manager/Electricity/ Operation/Hyderabad Zone, APCPDCL, Mint Compound, Hyderabad and pleased to quash said order as the same is illegal, arbitrary and not only contrary to Section 26(6) of the Electricity Act 1910 but also against the principles of natural justice and to pass such other further order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.NAZEER KHAN (Not present) Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.Kanakamedala Ravindra Kumar . The Court made the following :
ORDER: -
Operative part
This matter had come on 5-8-2004 and as none appeared on behalf of the petitioner and as there was no representation, the matter is adjourned. Even today, when the matter is called, none appears and there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. 13—08—2004. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Chief General Manager, Electry Operation, Hydrabad Zone, APCPDCL, Mint Compound, Hyderabad 2 Assistant Accounts Officer, ERO, Saroornagar, RAnga Reddy District 3 2 CD copies Stv/Rar
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Electricity Act, 2003 — s. 26(6).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 13 Aug 2004. The bench was B PRAKASH RAO.
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.