Dismissed

Ajay Chaturvedi S/O Shri Vinod Chandra Chaturvedi v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC17 Apr 2025CW/3658/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PIL by a retired Chief Engineer sought quashing of a joint venture between RRVUNL and NTPC for expansion and operation of Chhabra Thermal Power Plant units, claiming it would raise electricity rates. The court found the PIL misconceived and motivated, noting tariff determination is beyond judicial scope.

What the court decided

AI extract

Ajay Chaturvedi S/O Shri Vinod Chandra… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. (PIL) Civil Writ Petition No. 3658/2025

¶3

Ajay Chaturvedi S/o Shri Vinod Chandra Chaturvedi, Aged About 67 Years, R/o Bharat Smriti, New Post Office Road Bhimganj Mandi Kota Jn. Kota.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

Principal Secretary, Department Of Energy, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

Chairman And Managing Director, Rajasthan Discoms, Vidyud Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur.

¶9

Chairman And Managing Director, Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd., Vidyut Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur.

¶10

Chairman And Managing Director, Rajasthan Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd., Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur.

¶11

Chairman And Managing Director, National Thermal Power Corporation, Ntpc Bhawan, Scope Complex-7, Institutional Area Lodi Road, New Delhi- 110003.

¶12

The Comptroller And Auditor General Of India, Pocket-9, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Marg, New Delhi- 110124.

¶13

District Collector, Baran. 9. Rajasthan Vidyut Utpadan Samyukt Sangharsh Samiti, Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur, Through Coordinator.

¶14

----Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Pradeep Mathur with Mr. Ankit Nakwal
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Rajendra Prasad, AG with Mr. Tanay Goyal
		Mr. Umang Gupta
		Mr. Purusharth Saraf &
		Mr. DheerajMathur

¶16

(2 of 4)

¶17

[CW-3658/2025]

¶18

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA

¶19

Order

¶20

17/04/2025

¶21

Heard.

¶22

This PIL petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for a relief to quash and set aside joint venture dated 04.11.2024 and to restrain the respondents to proceed further pursuant to joint venture dated 04.11.2024.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that the petitioner who was a retired Chief Engineer has filed this petition and submitted details based on his expertise and knowledge in the field of generation of electricity that such kind of joint venture would eventually lead to production and distribution of electricity at higher rates, which would be against the public interest.

¶24

The petition, if we may say so, is not only utterly misconceived but appears to be filed with oblique motive. The joint venture has been entered into between the Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. and National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd., a Company incorporated and instrumentality of the Government of India. The joint venture, as it shows has been entered into for the objective of business to be carried out by the Company in the manner stated in para 3 thereof which includes the establishment, operation and maintenance of additional 660 MW/800 MW super critical units as per feasibility in the existing Chhabra Thermal Power Plant. It also one of the objectives to own and operate existing Units of Stage I in (4x250 MW) and Stage II (2x660MW) at the Chhabra Thermal Power Plant in the interest of

¶25

(3 of 4) [CW-3658/2025]

¶26

increasing the efficiency of the units thus reducing the cost of generation. One of the objectives of the joint venture is to explore the possibility of 15 to 20 years annuity based on R&M (Renovation and Modernization) of other old thermal units of the power stations of RRVUNL through NTPC or its Affiliates.

¶27

On the face of the objectives, the joint venture between the State undertaking and Government of India undertaking, not involving any private party, has been entered into not only for the establishment of additional power generation units but also cost effective generation. 6. The venture of the petitioner to file PIL is to seek judicial intervention towards assessment, at this stage, with regard to the rates of production and supply in future. The petitioner on his own figment of imagination has sought to canvass that such arrangements may lead to increased cost of production. 7. Determination of tariff depends upon many factors which cannot be gone into by this Court. We would not allow even the petitioner to enter into this venture merely because he happened to an engineer in the Electricity Department.

¶28

The petition appears to be motivated to only espouse the cause of certain sections of employees association who are opposing the joint venture. This is clear from various representations which have been placed on record. 9. We are of the view that this kind of PIL is nothing but an abuse of the process of law and sheer wastage of precious time of the Court. The petition has, therefore, to be dismissed with exemplary cost. A security amount of Rs. 50000/- has already been deposited. We are, however, of the view that the petitioner is

¶29

(4 of 4)

¶30

[CW-3658/2025]

¶31

required to pay a further cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- within a period of

¶32

two months.

¶33

The instant PIL petition is accordingly, dismissed.

¶34

(ANAND SHARMA),J

¶35

(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ

¶36

N.Gandhi/Neeru/s-200

Ajay Chaturvedi S/O Shri Vinod Chandra Chaturvedi v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ajay Chaturvedi S/O Shri Vinod Chandra Chaturvedi v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Murari Lal Estate Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. Gopal Ram S/O Shri Jagveer Singh Vs Akhil Arora

State of Rajasthan Vs Sandeep Madan Son of Shri R.K. Madan

Dr. Magan Das Vaishnava S/O Narayan Das Vaishnava Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. Nand Lal Jat Son of Shri Sunda Ram Jat Vs Akhil Arora,Additional Chief Secretary

Tola Ram Jakhar S/O Tejram Jakhar Vs State of Rajasthan