Jharkhand State Electricity Bo Vs M/S K.Y.S.Manufacturers And Exp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(C) No. 1837 of 2008

Jharkhand State Electricity Board through its Chairman, having the officer at Engineering Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O- Dhurwa, P.SJagarnathpur, Dist.- Ranchi. … … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

M/S K.Y.S. Manufacturers & Exporters (P) Ltd. Officiating at M- 47&48 Phase-IV, Adityapur Industrial Area, Gamharia, Jamshedpur through its one of the Directors Sandip Malhotra, s/o Late K. R. Malhotra, Residing at No. 2 Circuit House, North East Bistupur, Jamshedpur, Dist. Singhbhum. … … Respondent

¶6

¶7

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶8

¶9

For the petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, Advocate : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Devashish Bharuka, Senior Advocate : Mr. Shankar Lal Agarwal, Advocate : Ms. Ayushi, Advocate ---

¶10

18 /06.03.2024 Learned counsel for the parties are present.

¶11

2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

¶12

“a) For quashing/setting aside the order/judgment dated 28.02.2008 passed by the Electricity Ombudsman, Jharkhand in case no. EOJ/16/2007 to the extent and in relation to the issue whereby and whereunder the Electricity Ombudsman has erroneously set aside the bills raised upon the respondent from the months January 2004 and onwards on the basis of 100% of Contract demand and it has been further held interalia that the petitioner JSEB should raise the bills upon the respondent (an Induction Furnace Consumer) on the basis of the maximum demand recorded in the meter not only for 12 months from the date of commencement of electrical supply but for all the periods the respondent consumed the electricity as the consumer of the petitioner JSEB, ignoring its contract demand.

¶13

b) For a declaration from this Hon'ble Court that the induction furnace consumers (covered under HTSS Tariff) of JSEB including the respondent are to be governed by the tariff notification dated 06.04.2000 published by Bihar Electricity Board and duly adopted by Jharkhand State Electricity Board, which comprehensively contains the terms and conditions of Supply to the induction furnace consumers and the new tariff order published by Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission (in short to be referred as JSERC) w.e.f. 01.01.2004 does not contain the said terms and conditions of supply to the said categories of consumers.

¶14

c) For a further declaration that the demand charges in relation to induction furnace consumer including the respondent are to be levied by the petitioner on the basis of actual maximum demand reordered in the meter or 100% of the contract demand whichever is higher, from the very first day of commencement of supply.

¶15

d) For setting aside the order dated 25.09.2007 passed by the learned VUSNF in case no. 18/2007 which had been disposed of mainly in terms with the earlier orders passed by the learned Electricity Ombudsman in relation to the present issue.”

¶16

2

¶17

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the same issue is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 27764 of 2016 and he submits that this writ petition can be disposed of by observing that the parties would be governed by the judgment which may be eventually passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶18

4. Learned Senior counsel for the respondent has no objection to the prayer made. He is also in agreement with the fact that the issue involved in this writ petition would ultimately be governed by the pronouncement by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶19

5. In view of the aforesaid submission, this Court is not inclined to proceed any further in this writ petition.

¶20

6. This writ petition is disposed of by observing that the parties would be governed by the judgment which may be passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid Civil Appeal.

¶21

7. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed.

¶22

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶23

Pankaj

Jharkhand State Electricity Bo v. M/S K.Y.S.Manufacturers And Exp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jharkhand State Electricity Bo v. M/S K.Y.S.Manufacturers And Exp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagannath Bhagat Vs the Chairman Coal India Ltd. Cil

Indradeo Pandit Vs State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary Deptt of Higher and Technical Education

Sunita Devi Vs Central Coal Fields Limited through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

Sanjay Kumar Alias Sanjay Sao Alias Sanjay Sao Kanhu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Asha Prakash Vs the State of Jharkhand through Secretary Deptt of School Education and Literacy Development

Anju Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand