MYSORE MANUFACTURERS AND TRADERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The material facts are these: The petitioner, a Partnership firm engaged in the manufacture of plastic tops and laminations imported and installed a Dixon Pilot Quoting Machine and an Air Dryer in the Year 1973. The respondent Karnataka State Electricity Board sanctioned energy to the said installation subject to an authorised load of 98 HP and serviced the same with effect from 15-9-1973. It also fixed the monthly minimum charges payable on that basis. The petitioner has also averred that the respondent-2 never provided the required 200A fuses at their pole.

(2.) It is further averred in the writ Petition that the 2nd respondent in the writ Petition arbitrarily disconnected the power to the petitioner on false and trumped up charges on 6-6-74 and the Petitioner immediately appealed to the Chairman on 7-6-1974 and the Chairman appointed the Chief Engineer (South) to inspect and give his findings. The Chief Engineer, by his report dt. 30-8-1974 gave his findings exonerating the petitioner and recommended re-connection. But, the Board for the reasons best known to it did not give the re-connection. The petitioner was forced to file writ petition No. 1442/75, on the file of this Court, but the same was dismissed. But in appeal W. A. 353/1976 which was allowed on 1-6-1977 it was held that the disconnection was illegal and issued a writ of mandamus directing reconnection.

(3.) According to the petitioner, he has invested huge amounts borrowing from banks and financial institutions at heavy rates of interest and on account of the illegal and arbitrary disconnection of the energy for a period of three years, the machinery could not be worked and the petitioner has thus suffered heavy losses on account of the interference by the licensee and the petitioner is entitled to claim compensation for the inconvenience, as a result of an undue and illegal interference by resposdent-2. In spite of the reliefs granted to the petitioner in W. A. 353/76. the petitioner avers, that it was not possible to restart or rejuvenate the industry unless a fair compensation for this arbitrary and prolonged disconnection was received.