Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (1.59 seconds)U.P.State Textile Corp.Ltd vs Suresh Kumar on 2 February, 2011
12. So far as the penalty is concerned, it is not disputed that the same is not inconsistent with the requirement of the statute and no patent illegality could be pointed out therein also. In fact this Court having heard learned counsel for the petitioner found that the present writ petition is wholly frivolous and having been filed without there being any substance whatsoever though even the petitioners were satisfied that they have billed the consumer wrongly and the orders of respondents No.2 and 3, impugned in the writ petition, are basically correct. The petitioners being a company wholly owned by State Government owe its duty and obligation to the public and is not supposed to file vexatious and frivolous cases before the Court. A Division Bench of this Court in Service Bench No.506 of 2011 (State of U.P. Vs. Sri Suresh Kumar) decided on 22.09.2011 castigating such an approach on the part of State Government or its instrumentalities observed :
U.P. State Industrial Development ... vs Brij Bhushan Singh & Another on 2 February, 2010
29. One of us (Hon'ble Devi Prasad, J.) recently in Writ Petition No. 474 (SB) of 2011 (State of U.P and another Vs. Brij Bhushan Sharma), decided on 17.03.2011, by a Division Bench presided by Hon'ble the Chief Justice, has deprecated such practice of State of filing frivolous writ petitions challenging the order of Tribunal as under:
The Societies Registration Act, 1860
1