Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/274/2026 of RADIANT BAR PRIVATE LIMITED Vs UTTARAKHAND POWER CORPORATION LIMITED on 5 February 2026
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPMS No.274 of 2026 Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J. Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. D. Barthwal, learned counsel for the
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
WPMS No.274 of 2026 Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J.
Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Mr. D. Barthwal, learned counsel for the respondents.
3. By means of present writ petition, petitioner has sought quashing of the notice/order/letter dated 12.01.2026, issued by respondent no.2.
4. Petitioner runs an electric furnace for the manufacture of ingots. The power connection of the petitioner has been disconnected for non-deposit of electricity dues for consecutive two months. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court.
5. Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, learned Counsel appearing for the UPCL, points out that electricity dues pending against the petitioner are around Rs.3 crores therefore it is not possible to continue power supply to the petitioner any further.
6. Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is not financially able to pay the entire dues at once. However, the petitioner is ready to deposit a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs upfront, and the remaining dues would be paid by the petitioner along with the regular bill payments.
7. The relief claimed by the petitioner cannot be granted in a writ petition.
8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to make proposal to the competent
2 authority/UPCL. If petitioner submits his proposal within five days along with deposit of Rs.50 lakhs, the competent authority/UPCL shall consider his proposal and take appropriate decision, as per law, within ten days thereafter.
9. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
10. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.
(Siddhartha Sah, J.) Vacation Judge 05.02.2026 AK