Rubi v. Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam & ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CWP No. 21190 of 2016 Date of Decision: July 12, 2017.

Rubi ....Petitioner

Versus

Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and another .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Ramesh Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Deepak Balyan, Advocate for the respondents.

Rajan Gupta, J (Oral) Petitioner has posed a challenge to the order dated 17.6.2015 Annexure P/10 passed by SDO (Operation) Sub Urban, UHBVN, Jhajjar. It has been urged before the court that petitioner is entitled to electric connection as she has installed a tubewell in her land. An application was submitted by her for grant of connection, same has been rejected by a short and cryptic order. Learned counsel for the petitioner thus prays that the matter be remitted to the same authority for decision afresh after affording her opportunity of hearing. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to this prayer.

Under the circumstances, order Annexure P/10 is hereby setaside. Matter is remitted to the same authority for decision afresh expeditiously preferably within a period of 3 months after giving the opportunity of hearing.

Writ petition is allowed in these terms.

(Rajan Gupta) Judge July 12, 2017.

BB Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No