The Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an award by the Permanent Lok Adalat. The court held that Article 227 of the Constitution does not permit the High Court to interfere with factual findings where no jurisdictional error, patent illegality, or perversity is established.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17984 / 2017
...Petitioner/Applicants
Versus
...Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshul Sharma.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA
Order
14/10/2017
Heard the counsel for the petitioner and perused the award dated 23.08.2017 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat Bharatpur whereby the application filed by the petitioner against the respondent-JVVNL against their demand of Rs.63,750/- has been dismissed.
From the award dated 23.08.2017, it is apparent that even though the petitioner’s meter for recording of electric supply
(2 of 2)
[CW-17984/2017]
in respect of consumer connection No.2203/0480 for agricultural purpose was burned out on 28.01.2013, an inspection of his premises by the Vigilance Team, JVVNL found that electric supply therefrom was being drawn. In fact two Tubewells in the ownership of the petitioners were being worked with the electricity supply. In the circumstances on the basis of VCR report a demand of Rs.63,750/- was raised against the petitioners.
The permanent Lok Adalat has noted that there was no denial that the petitioner owned two tubewells. Nor was there any evidence from the revenue record that the petitioner’s crops had been damaged for lack of water supply. This water supply the permanent Lok Adalat rightly inferred could not have been drawn but from tubewells run on electric supply by the JVVNL.
Counsel for the petitioner except for attempting to impugn the award the permanent Lok Adalat under challenge on facts, which this court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India cannot countenance, has not been able to point out any jurisdictional error, patent illegality nor perversity in the award dated 23.08.2017.
The petition is without force. Dismissed.
(ALOK SHARMA) J.
Himanshu/6.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can intervene in the award passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat on questions of fact under Article 227 of the Constitution.
Whether the Permanent Lok Adalat committed jurisdictional error, patent illegality, or perversity in dismissing the petitioner's demand against the electricity discharge warrant.
Whether the High Court is justified in dismissing the writ petition challenging the award of the Permanent Lok Adalat.
Bhajan Lal S/o Shri Ramgopal Sharma
Radhakishan S/o Shri Ramgopal Sharma
Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited
Allok Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
