KRISHNA KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. V K JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DILIP Gupta, J. This Contempt Petition has been filed against two officers of the U. P. Power Corporation namely Sri V. K. Jain, Executive Engineer and Sri Har Bhagwan Arora, Deputy General Manager as well as against the District Magistrate Ghaziabad, Sri Santosh Yadav and the Tehsildar Hapur, Sri K. B. Singh with the allegation that the opposite parties have wilfully disobeyed the interim order dated 10th January, 2005 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 54627 of 2004.

(2.) THE aforesaid Writ Petition had been filed by the present petitioner for quashing the demand notices dated 6th April, 2004 and 12th April, 2004 that had been issued by the Executive Engineer/prescribed Authority, U. P. Power Corpo ration Limited, Hapur purportedly in exercise of the power conferred under Sec tion 3 of the U. P. Government Electrical Undertakings (Dues Recovery) Act, 1958. In the said writ petition the U. P. Power Corporation Limited, Shakti Bhawan through its Chairman was arrayed as respondent No. 1 while the Executive Engineer Prescribed Authority, UP. Power Corporation Limited, Hapur was arrayed as re spondent No. 2. THE respondents were represented in the Court by their learned Standing Counsel. On 10th January, 2005 when the matter was taken up by the Court, the respondents prayed for and were granted three weeks' time to file the counter affidavit. THE petitioner was granted two weeks' thereafter to file the re joinder affidavit and the petition was directed to be listed thereafter. THE Court, considering the fact that the amount was sought to be recovered from the peti tioner who was not a consumer but an employee of the U. P Power Corporation Limited, also ordered that the operation of the notices/directions dated 6th April. 2004 and 12th April, 2004 issued by the Executive Engineer/prescribed Authority shall remain stayed.

(3.) AN application dated 13th February, 2006 along with an affidavit sworn on 10th February, 2006 was filed by Sri Santosh Yadav, District Magistrate, Ghaziabad for discharging the contempt notice issued against him. It was mentioned therein that the interim order dated 10th January, 2005 was never served upon him; that on 28th May, 2005 a recovery certificate was sent by the Power Corporation for recovery of the amount and in view of the said recovery certificate, the citation was issued against the petitioner on 24th June, 2005 and it is on the basis of this citation that the petitioner was arrested on 9lh November, 2005 as he did not deposit the amount. It has also been stated that the petitioner had challenged the recovery notices dated 6th April, 2004 and 12th April, 2004 but the citation that had been issued was on the basis of the demand notice dated 28th May, 2005 and that when the Executive Engineer sent the letter dated 10th November, 2005, the applicant was released from civil prison.