Dinesh B Parikh Vs Jharkhand Bijli Vitaran Nigam Ltd. through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI W.P. (C.) No. 2288 of 2024

----

Dinesh B. Parikh, aged about 81 years, son of late Bhagwanji V. Parikh, resident of “Gokul”, 9, Park Road Bistupur, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S. – Bistupur, District – East Singhbhum

¶4

.... Petitioner

¶5

-- Versus --

¶6

1. Jharkhand Bijli Vitaran Nigam Limited, through its Chairmancum-Managing Director, Engineering Building, HEC, P.O. & P.S. – Dhurwa, District – Ranchi

¶7

2. Managing Director, Jharkhand Bijli Vitaran Nigam Limited, Engineering Building, HEC, P.O. & P.S. – Dhurwa, District – Ranchi

¶8

3. Electrical Executive Engineer (C&R), Electric Circle, Jharkhand Bijli Vitaran Nigam Limited, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S. – Jamshedpur, District – East Singhbhum

¶9

4. Certificate Officer (Electric Revenue), Seraikela Kharsawan, Karandih, Sundernagar, Town-Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S. – Sundernagar, District – Singhbhum (East)

¶10

.... Respondents

¶11

¶12

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶13

--For the Petitioner :- Mr. Nawniti Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate For the JUVNL :- Mr. Jayant Franklin Toppo, Sr. S.C. :- Mr. Amit Raj Kisku, AC to Sr. SC ----

¶14

03/ 12.08.2024 Heard learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶15

and learned counsel appearing for the JUVNL.

¶16

2. The prayer in the writ petition is made for quashing of the

¶17

order dated 15.03.2024 (Annexure-9) passed in Certificate Case

¶18

No.01 (Elect.)/99-2000 titled as ‘Electrical Executive Engineer (C&R),

¶19

--1--

¶20

W.P. (C.) No. 2288 of 2024

¶21

Jamshedpur-versus-M/S Jamshedpur Cement Ltd., Adityapur’ passed by the respondent-Certificate Officer, Seraikela Kharsawan holding the same to be null & void, illegal, malafide, violative of the principles of natural justice, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and unconstitutional. Further prayer is made to allow the petition dated 15.10.2016 (annexure-4) filed under section 11 of the Bihar and Orissa Public demands Recovery Act, 1914 in the said certificate case.

¶22

3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that on 05.04.1989 M/s Jamshedpur Cement Limited, a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act of which the petitioner was the Managing director, signed a High-Tension Agreement with the erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board. He submits that the petitioner has signed the said agreement on behalf of the said company and pursuant to that the company received supply of electricity under the said agreement from the Electricity Board aforesaid and due to some financial exigencies certain electricity bill was not paid and for that the said certificate case was instituted for demand of Rs.1,96,46,249/-. He draws the attention of the Court to Annexure-2 which is the requisition for certificate. By way of referring to Annexure-2/1, Mr. Singh, learned senior counsel further submits that to the said requisition for certificate was issued to the petitioner in absence of the company. Annexure-2/1 is the certificate issued by the Certificate Officer to the said amount

¶23

--2--

¶24

W.P. (C.) No. 2288 of 2024

¶25

against three directors of the said company and the said certificate is not against the company. He submits this issue has set address in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Division Bench of Patna High Court in the case of Kanhaiya Lal vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2002 SCC OnLine Pat 332 . He then submits that in this background the petitioner has filed a petition dated 05.10.2016 before the Certificate Officer inviting the attention of Section 11 of Bihar and Orissa Public demands Recovery Act, 1914 and requested to modify the certificate in the light of the said section, however, no decision was taken thereafter, the petitioner has moved before this Court in W.P. (C.) No.1624/2018 which was disposed of by order dated 10.01.2024 directing the respondent No.2 who is the Certificate Officer to dispose of the petition dated 15.10.2016. Learned senior counsel by way of inviting the attention of the Court to Annexure-9A and submits that no decision has been taken on the said petition, however, the Certificate Officer has reiterated that final order is already passed and the petitioner has called upon to pay the said amount. He further submits that the Certificate Officer is an Officer of the Electricity Department and he is not competent to decide the same.

¶26

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that by way of Annexure-9 the said petition in view of the order of the High Court has not been disposed of, however order of the High Court is there. He submits that matter may kindly be remanded back to the

¶27

--3--

¶28

W.P. (C.) No. 2288 of 2024

¶29

concerned Certificate Officer to decide the same.

¶30

5. In view of the above, the order dated 15.03.2024/18.03.2024 (Annexure-9) passed in Certificate Case No.01 (Elect.)/99-2000 titled as ‘Electrical Executive Engineer (C&R), Jamshedpur-versus-M/S Jamshedpur Cement Ltd., Adityapur’ passed by the respondent-Certificate Officer, Seraikela Kharsawan is hereby quashed.

¶31

6. The matter is remitted back to the respondent No.4 to pass the order in accordance with law in the light of earlier direction of the Court passed in W.P. (C.) No.1624 of 2018.

¶32

7. In the light of the order passed in W.P. (C.) No.1624 of 2018, the Certificate Officer is required to dispose of the petition dated 15.10.2016 with a reasoned order in light of Section 11 of Bihar and Orissa Public demands Recovery Act, 1914 as the direction of Co-ordinate Bench already there to decide the same accordingly.

¶33

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶34

Sangam/

¶35

--4--

¶36

W.P. (C.) No. 2288 of 2024

Dinesh B Parikh v. Jharkhand Bijli Vitaran Nigam Ltd. through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh B Parikh v. Jharkhand Bijli Vitaran Nigam Ltd. through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pravin Kumar Vs the Union of India through C B I

Anil Kumar Mehrotra Vs the Union of India through C B I

Ankit Kumar Srivastava Vs the Union of India through C B I

Masui Murmu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shree Prasad Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rahul Kumar Baraik Vs the State of Jharkhand