ANIL ARORA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, HARIDWAR & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Present petition has been filed by the petitioner for a direction to the respondent no. 1 to decide the application of the petitioner dated 21.07.2016 forthwith.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is a resident of Bangali Colony, BHEL Ranipur, Haridwar and is having experience in providing the cable services to the subscribers. He submitted that petitioner wishes to provide cable service of his own in the name of Guru Nanak Cable T.V. Network Rajnagar Gol, Gurdawara Haridwar. For the said purpose, the petitioner, on 21.07.2016, approached the respondent no. 1, through respondent no. 2, and applied for grant of permission in the prescribed format as provided in Form-1, Rule 2 & 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Cable Television Network (Exhibition) Rules, 1997. It is alleged that the said application was received in the office of respondent no. 2 on 22.08.2016, but the same has not been decided so far. Hence, this writ petition.