Dismissed

M/s.Varadha Steels, v. Union Territory of Pondicherry

Madras HC24 Feb 2022WP/31083/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking refund of Rs.80 lakhs deposited by a steel company. The Court held that since a final assessment order for alleged energy theft was already issued challenging the provisional assessment, the petitioner is not entitled to refund at this stage. Petitioner retains liberty to challenge the final order.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner not entitled to refund; liberty granted to challenge final assessment order.

M/s.Varadha Steels, Vs Union Territory of Pondicherry — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 24.02.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN

¶5

W.P.NO.31083 OF 2016 AND W.M.P.NO.26949 OF 2016

¶6

M/s.Varadha Steels, No.15, Big Street, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010, Rep. by its Managing Partner, K.A.Babu.

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

.Vs.

¶9

The Union Territory of Puducherry, Represented by Superintending Engineer-I/Principal Engineer, Electricity Department, Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.

¶10

The Union Territory of Puducherry, Represented by Superintending Engineer-III, Electricity Department, Government of Puducherry, Puducherry. ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in Order No.3058/ED/EE-IV/F-Varadha Steel/16-17, dated 08.08.2016 on the file of the 2nd respondent (Superintending Engineer-III) and quash the same, consequently direct the respondents to refund the sum of Rs.80 lakhs with interest at 24% per annum from 22.03.2006 which is deposited as per order dated 15.03.2006, made in CMP.No.1994 of 2006 in CMA No.527 of 2006.

¶12

For Petitioner : M/s.S.Harinyi For Respondents : Mr.J.Kumaran Additional Government Pleader (Pondy)

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the respondents declining to return the amount deposited by the petitioner.

¶16

Earlier, the petitioner's service connection has been disconnected alleging theft of energy. Pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court, the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.80,00,000/- for reconnection of the disconnected electricity connection. Thereafter, according to the petitioner, a criminal case has been registered against the petitioner for theft of energy, which has ended in acquittal and that order has also become final.

¶17

In the above circumstances, the petitioner made an application to the respondents seeking for refund of the amount deposited by him but his request has been rejected on the ground that already provisional assessment has been initiated for theft of energy, and theft of energy was assessed to the tune of Rs.2,65,37,000/- and hence the amount paid by the petitioner was adjusted towards the same by the Department.

¶18

After issuing provisional assessment order and after enquiry, the respondents also passed final assessment order. Now challenging the same, the petitioner has filed another writ petition in W.P.No.34185 of 2017 and this Court disposed the said writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the final assessment order before the Appellate Authority.

¶19

In the above circumstance, since already final assessment order has already been issued against the petitioner, at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled for refund. However the petitioner is at liberty to file necessary petition challenging the final assessment order. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar(CCC)

¶22

//True Copy//

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶26

¶27

The Superintending Engineer-I/ Principal Engineer, Electricity Department, Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.

¶28

The Superintending Engineer-III, Electricity Department, Government of Puducherry,

¶29

Puducherry.

¶30

+5ccs to M/s.S.Harinyi, Advocate, S.R.No.12521 +1cc to the Government Pleader (Puducherry), S.R.No.12873

¶31

W.P.NO.31083 OF 2016 AND W.M.P.NO.26949 OF 2016

¶32

MG(CO) PBS/12/04/2022

¶33

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/s.Varadha Steels, v. Union Territory of Pondicherry

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Varadha Steels, v. Union Territory of Pondicherry

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gandhinagar Cricket & Sports Vs The Secretary to Government

A.Thangavel Vs The Divisional Manager

Mr.M.Natarajan, Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

R.Murugesan Vs The Chief Information

Dr.Ravindra Subbanna, Vs The Chairman-cum-Managing

R.Murugan, Vs The Secretary to Government