Partly allowed

Aapeshwar Granite v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC22 Nov 2023CW/9688/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench held that the present writ petition was covered by a co-ordinate bench judgment in Bhansali Dyeing. Relying on that decision, the court partly allowed the petition, directing the respondents to recover special fuel surcharge only to the extent of original principal amounts.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 01.09.2022 and order dated 13.06.2019 are quashed to the extent of levy of interest/carrying costs and special fuel surcharge beyond original principal amount.

Aapeshwar Granite Vs State of Rajasthan — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:40164]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9688/2023

¶4

Aapeshwar Granite, Proprietorship/partner Pushpendra Singh S/o Sohan Singh, Age About 34 Yrs, R/o, Manpura Colony Jalore Rajasthan.

¶5

Navdeep Stone, Proprietorship/partner Deepak Kumar S/o Jhuta Ram, Age About 29 Yrs, R/o, Near Godiji Mandir Jalore Rajasthan.

¶6

Ashok Industries, Proprietorship/partner Ashok Kumar S/ o Sohan Lal, Age About 34 Yrs, R/o, Rampura Colony Jalore Rajasthan.

¶7

Mahalaxmi Stone, Proprietorship/partner Dilip Singh S/o Mohan Singh, Age About 39 Yrs, R/o, Near Nagar Parishad Jalore Rajasthan.

¶8

Aapnath Granite, Proprietorship/partner Dilip Singh S/o Sohan Singh, Age About 39 Yrs, R/o, R/o, Manpura Colony Jalore Rajasthan

¶9

Santosh Granites, Proprietorship/partner Lala Ram S/o Kapoora Ram, Age About 48 Yrs, R/o, Adoni Kurnool Andhara Pardesh.

¶10

Sheetal Industries, Proprietorship/partner Vinay Choudhary S/o Bhiyaram, Age About 60 Yrs, R/o, Madri Jalore Rajasthan.

¶11

Radheshyam Granite, Proprietorship/partner Rakesh Kumar S/o Bhanwar Lal, Age About 42 Yrs, R/o, Sai Vihar Colony Jalore Rajasthan.

¶12

Bherunath Granite, Proprietorship/partner Mahendra Singh S/o Papji Gurjar, Age About 36 Yrs, R/o, Rajendra Nagar Jalore Rajasthan

¶13

Krishna Stone Mart, Proprietorship/partner Sunil Kumar S/o Dharma Ram, Age About 41 Yrs, R/o, Besroli Nagaur Rajasthan

¶14

Maruti Granite And Marble, Proprietorship/partner Purshotam S/o Hastimal, Age About 39 Yrs, R/o, Bagra Jalore Rajasthan

¶15

Maruti Marble Industries, Proprietorship/partner Kanti Lal Agarwal S/o Biju Lal Agarwal, Age About 51 Yrs, R/o, Bagra Jalore Rajasthan

(2 of 5)

[2023:RJ-JD:40164]

[CW-9688/2023]

Jay Laxmi Granite, Proprietorship/partner Sukan Kumar S/o Biju Lal Agarwal, Age About 48 Yrs, R/o, Bagra Dist. Jalore Rajasthan

¶20

Maruti Granimarmo, Proprietorship/partner Surekha Agarwal W/o Sukan Kumar, Age About 44 Yrs, R/o, Bagra Jalore Rajasthan

¶21

Bhawani Granite, Proprietorship/partner Shanti Lal S/o Bhimaram, Age About 46 Yrs, R/o, Badanwari Ahore Jalore Rajasthan

¶22

Shree Ridhi Sidhi Granites, Proprietorship/partner Renu Devi W/o Mahaveer Prasad, Age About 52 Yrs, R/o, Ashapurna Colony Jalore Rajasthan

¶23

Rajdhani Granite, Proprietorship/partner Raju S/o Gajaram, Age About 33 Yrs, R/o, Maheshpura Road Jalore Rajasthan

¶24

Usha Granimarmo, Proprietorship/partner Moolchand S/o Trilokchand, Age About 40 Yrs, R/o, Shivshinghpura Sikar Rajasthan

¶25

K.p. Stones, Proprietorship/partner Morki Devi S/o Chunni Lal , Age About 50 Yrs, R/o, Pathan Badi Begam Bazar Nampali Hyderabad Andhra Pardesh

¶26

Shree Shanti Granite, Proprietorship/partner Manish Kumar S/o Om Prakash, Age About 34 Yrs, R/o, Sanjay Colony Ghandhipura Balotra Rajasthan

¶27

Chesta Granite, Proprietorship/partner Pappu Kumar Yadav S/o Parbhati Lal, Age About 36 Yrs, R/o, Udepura Sikar Rajasthan

¶28

Navratan Industries, Proprietorship/partner Ramkaran S/o Mohan Lal, Age About 42 Yrs, R/o, Kundalpur Sikar Rajasthan

¶29

Rameshwar Export Industries, Proprietorship/partner Jay Chand Naga S/o Rameshwar Lal, Age About 23 Yrs, R/o, Khatinada Sikar Rajasthan

¶30

Sonana Granite, Proprietorship/partner Iswar Lal S/o Kasna Ram, Age About 45 Yrs, R/o, Chrbhujha Eng. Ahore Jalore Rajasthan

¶31

Raksha Stone, Proprietorship/partner Jesaram S/o Hansaram , Age About 50 Yrs, R/o, Galdhani Jawaibandh Sumerpur Rajasthan

[2023:RJ-JD:40164]

[CW-9688/2023]

(3 of 5)

----Petitioners

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Energy, Government Of Rajasthan, It Center, Chambal Power House Campus, Hawa Sarak, Jaipur-302006.

¶38

Rajasthan Electricity Regulation Commission, Through Its Chairman Vidhyut Viniyamak Bhawan, Sahakar Marg, Near State Motor Garage, Jaipur Rajasthan 302001.

¶39

Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Through Its Managing Director, New Power House, Industrial Area, Jodhpur (Raj.) 342005.

¶40

The Additional Engineer (O And M), Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd, Jalore.

¶41

The Assistant Engineer (O And M), Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Jalore.

¶42

The Additional Chief Engineer (Hq), Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., New Power House, Industrial Area, Jodhpur (Raj.) 342005.

¶43

----Respondents

¶44

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. VijayBishnoi
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG Mr. Manish Tak

¶45

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

¶46

Judgment

¶47

22/11/2023

¶48

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the controversy rests decided by judgment of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11242/2023 (Bhansali Dyeing, Proprietorship/ partner Ravi Mehta vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on 09.11.2023.

(4 of 5)

[2023:RJ-JD:40164]

[CW-9688/2023]

Learned counsel for the respondents does not refute the above submission.

¶53

The Court while partly allowing the aforesaid writ petitions, held as under:-

¶54

11. Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussion and the observations made hereinabove, the present petitions are partly allowed.

¶55

11.1. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 01.09.2022,alongwith the entire proceedings and orders pursuant thereto, only to the extent of levy of interest/carrying costs on the original principal amount of Rs.3,048.64 Crores, so also the interest/carrying costs amount payable towards other heads and categories, are quashed and set aside. Needless to say that the amount to be charged towards special fuel surcharge can be recovered from the consumers only to the extent of original principal amount to the tune of Rs.3,048.64/- Crores.

¶56

11.2. This Court observes that the aforesaid order has already covered almost all the issues in the present litigation, however, in some of the instant writ petitions, the order dated 13.06.2019has been challenged and the said order is also hereby quashed and set aside, only to the extent of the interest/carrying costs amount payable on the original principal amount as on the date of passing of the said order; thus, recovery of special fuel surcharge to be made only to the extent of the original principal amount in pursuance of the said impugned order on the same analogy as discussed above for quashing the order dated01.09.2022. During the process of making such recovery, amount, if any, already recovered towards special fuel surcharge from the consumers by the respondents, the same shall be duly adjusted. Except for recovery of the original principal amount, the entire proceedings and orders in pursuance of the said impugned order are also quashed and set aside. 11.3. Thus, the respondent-DISCOMS shall be accordingly free to proceed to recover the respective original principal amounts from the consumers under the head of special fuel surcharge, strictly in accordance with this judgment.

¶57

In view of the submission made and in view of the fact that

¶58

the present matter being covered by the judgment of

(5 of 5)

[2023:RJ-JD:40164]

[CW-9688/2023]

Bhansali Dyeing (supra) is not refuted by learned counsel for the respondents, the present writ petition is also partly allowed in terms of the same directions as issued in the case of Bhansali

¶63

Dyeing (supra).

¶64

Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, also stand dismissed.

¶65

(REKHA BORANA),J

¶66

157-KashishS/-

Aapeshwar Granite v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aapeshwar Granite v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nimba Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Moda Ram Bhadu Vs State of Rajasthan

Bandhan Bank Limited Vs the District Magistrate/Collector

Dr. Vaibhav Kumar Somvanshi Vs the State of Rajasthan

Moola Ram Vs Pragatisheel Khadi and W.S.W.S.S.Ltd.and Ors.

Tulsa Ram and Ors. Vs State and Ors.