Disposed

New Tech Steel and Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Gauhati HC16 Dec 2021I.A.(Civil)/1935/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of an interlocutory application seeking restoration of electricity connection. The court directed the authorities to restore the connection immediately without adjudicating the disputed assessment bill, subject to the outcome of the main writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to APDCL authorities to restore the electricity connection forthwith.

New Tech Steel and Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of… — RTI and Transparency | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010182872021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1935/2021 In WP(C)/5427/2020

¶5

NEW TECH STEEL AND ALLOYS PVT LTD. A PVT. LTD. COMPANY HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT N.H. 39, NEAR CRPF GROUP CENTRE, P.O. KHATKHATI, DIST. KARBI ANGLONG, PIN-782480, AND REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR. HARSH SHARMA, S/O. LT. PAWAN KUMAR SHARMA, R/O. 6TH FLOOR, ASSAM ISPAT COMPLEX, FATASHIL, GUWAHATI-781009, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS. REP. BY COMMISSIONER AND SECY., THE DEPTT. OF POWER AND INDUSTRIES, GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06

¶8

2:JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF POWER AND INDUSTRIES GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-06.

¶9

3:ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED (APDCL) REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 4TH FLOOR BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-01.

¶10

4:CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER KANCH ELECTRICAL CIRCLE APDCL CAR DIPHU.

¶11

Page No.# 2/5

¶12

5:DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED. KANCH CAR DIPHU. 6:ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (IRCA) KANCH ELECTRICAL CIRCLE APDCL CAR DIPHU.

¶13

7:SUB-DIVISIONAL ENGINEER BOKAJAN ELECT. SUB-DIVISION APDCL CAR BOKAJAN.

¶14

8:DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER BOKAJAN ELECT. SUB-DIVISION APDCL CAR BOKAJAN.

¶15

9:ASSISTANT MANAGER(F AND A) KANCH ELECTRICAL CIRCLE APDCL CAR DIPHU 10:DEPUTY MANAGER IRCA KANCH APDCL DIPH

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M MORE

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, APDCL

¶18

BEFORE

¶19

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Date : 16-12-2021

¶22

Heard Shri PK Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Shri PN

¶23

Page No.# 3/5

¶24

Goswami, learned Addl. Advocate General, Assam representing the Assam Power Distribution Company Ltd. (for short APDCL).

¶25

2. By the present interlocutory application, a prayer has been made for setting aside and quashing of the letter dated 09.07.2021 whereby the applicant was demanded payment of assessment bill, failing which the power supply to the applicant’s factory premises was threatened to be disconnected. The electricity connection was disconnected on 27.07.2021.

¶26

3. It is the case of the applicant that challenging an assessment order for payment of an amount of Rs.2,08,60,731/-, a writ petition, being WP(C)/5427/2020 has been instituted. In the said writ petition, an order has been passed on 11.12.2020 whereby, as an interim measure, it was provided that the final assessment bill and demand for payment of the amount shall remain suspended till the returnable date. It appears from the records that the aforesaid interim order has not been put to challenge in any higher court and till date, the interim order is operating.

¶27

4. Shri Sharma, learned counsel, accordingly submits that demand for payment of the aforesaid amount and the subsequent action of disconnecting the electricity supply to the applicant’s industrial premises are absolutely illegal apart from being contemptuous qua the order dated 11.12.2020. It is further submitted that in fact, a contempt petition, being Cont. Cas(C)/450/2021 has been filed in which notices have been issued.

¶28

5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that such disconnection apart from being violative of the order dated 11.12.2020, is causing grave prejudice to the business of the applicant.

¶29

Page No.# 4/5

¶30

6. On the other hand, Shri Goswami, learned Addl. Advocate General has submitted that disconnection has been done in accordance with law as the applicant has failed to pay the assessment amount which is a huge one. He also submits that so far as the interim order dated 11.12.2020 is concerned, a separate interlocutory application, being IA(C)/1098/2021 for vacation of the said order is pending consideration. The learned State Counsel, however, submits that till date, the interim order is in force.

¶31

7. This Court is of the view that without making any observation on the inter-se merits of the parties connected to the dispute by balancing the equities, the interest of justice would be served if an order of restoration is passed which would be subject to the outcome of the writ petition wherein the assessment order itself is the subject matter of dispute.

¶32

8. Accordingly, the APDCL authorities are directed to restore the electricity connection forthwith.

¶33

9. It is needless to say that whatever charges would be required for such reconnection would be borne by the applicant and fresh bills may be raised after reconnection for the energy consumed by the applicant.

¶34

10. It is made clear that the present interim order shall not vest any right upon the applicant and has been granted only as a temporary measure during the pendency of the writ petition.

¶35

11. IA(C)/1098/2021 filed for modification of the interim order would be considered along with the main writ petition.

¶36

Page No.# 5/5

¶37

12. Interlocutory application stands disposed of.

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

Comparing Assistant

New Tech Steel and Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

New Tech Steel and Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jugeswar Nath Vs P.K.Buragohain

Guneswari Deka Kalita and 4 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Ajmat Ali and 6 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Manish Kumar Singh Vs the Union of India

Siddheswar Rabha Vs the State of Assam

Sankar Sutradhar and Anr. Vs State of Assam