Lalji v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39495 of 2023 Petitioner :- Lalji Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suneel Kumar Mishra,Pramod Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sushil Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J. Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.

¶1From the record we find that when a final assessment order was passed on 27.05.2023 the petitioner had objected to it on

28.06.2023. From a perusal of the reply of the petitioner it appears that the petitioner had not been served with any provisional assessment. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that if the petitioner had not received any provisional assessment then no occasion arose for the petitioner to file any reply/objection to it.

¶2Learned counsel appearing for the Electricity Department has, looking to the fact that no provisional assessment order was served on the petitioner, submitted that if the petitioner replies now to the provisional assessment then the same shall be decided in accordance with law.

¶3Learned counsel for the Electricity Department has in the Court supplied the provisional assessment order dated 11.09.2020 to the petitioner. The petitioner may now reply to the provisional assessment within a period of fifteen days. Thereafter, the petitioner be heard on 19.12.2023 and the Electricity Department after hearing the petitioner may decide the case of the petitioner and pass the final assessment order within a period of two months from 19.12.2023.

¶4For a period of two months or till the final decision is taken, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. Since we have directed the Electricity Department to once again look into the reply of the petitioner, the final assessment order dated 27.05.2023 shall remain in abeyance till a decision is taken.

¶5With these observations, the writ petitioner stands disposed of. Order Date :- 17.11.2023 M.S. Ansari (Manoj Bajaj, J.) (Siddhartha Varma, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad