Jaya Krishna Maharana Vs State of Odisha

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as Mr.L.K.Moharana, learned counsel appearing for TPCODL. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶17

The present Writ Petition has been filed with a prayer for a direction to the Opposite Parties, particularly Opposite Party no.3 to accept the Appeal Memo under section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 after condoning the delay, if any, in

¶18

Page 1 of 4.

¶19

preferring an appeal before the appellate authority under section 127 of the said Act. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner being aggrieved by the assessment order under Annexure-7 to the Writ Petition, has preferred an appeal. He further contended that when the appeal memo was presented, the same was not accepted on the ground of delay. He further contended that since the Appellate authority does not have the power to condone the delay, the appeal preferred by the Petitioner has become infructuous. Therefore, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition challenging the assessment order passed under section 126 of the Indian Electricity Act.

¶20

In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that this Court in some similar cases has taken a view that in the event appeal memo is submitted along with an application for condonation of delay, the same shall be considered by the appellate authority in accordance with law. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be permitted to present the appeal along with an application for condonation of delay.

¶21

Mr.Moharana, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties, on the other hand contended that there is no provision for condonation of delay under section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003. In such view of the matter, he further contended that since the appeal is barred by limitation prescribed under section 127 of the Indian Electricity Act, the delay cannot be condoned by the appellate authority.

¶22

Page 2 of 4.

¶23

Having heard learned counsels for the respective parties, on a careful consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court observes that although Section 126 of the Act provides that an appeal could be preferred within 30 days from the date of assessment order, but, there is no provision of condonation of delay under the said Section. However, on careful examination of the Section 127 of the Electricity Act, this Court found that there is no bar for condonation of delay or with regard to applicability of section 5 of the Limitation Act. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the provisions contained in Section 5 of the Limitation Act would be applicable as there is no express bar in law with regard to exercise of such power by the appellate authority under section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

¶24

In view of the aforesaid analysis, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition by granting liberty to the Petitioner to present the appeal Memo along with an application for condonation of delay explaining the delay, within a period of two weeks from today. In such eventuality, the same shall be considered in accordance with law by taking a lenient view.

¶25

Further, it is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the electricity connection has been disconnected by the Opposite Party-Company a few days ago. He further contended that although the Petitioner has deposited 50% of the demanded amount, however the authority has not taken steps for reconnection of electricity. Taking into consideration the aforesaid development, the

¶26

Page 3 of 4.

¶27

RKS

¶28

Petitioner is directed to approach the appellate authority. In such eventuality, the same shall be considered forthwith under section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

¶29

Issue urgent certified copy of this order in course of the day.

¶30

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)

¶31

Judge

¶32

Signature Not Verified Page 4 of 4.

¶33

Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 24-Jan-2025 18:13:14

Jaya Krishna Maharana v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaya Krishna Maharana v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mallik Mustakin @ Hosen Vs State of Odisha

Sunita Das Vs State of Odisha

Bhagaban Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Rohit Ku Deheri Vs State of Odisha

Bapusri Bikash Narayan Das Vs State of Odisha

Basanti Nayak Vs State of Odisha