RAMAKRISHNA REDDY Vs. MAHANTHESH BILAGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainants are before this Court alleging willful disobedience of the order dtd. 23/4/2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.Nos.54593/2017, 54595/2017, 54594/2017 and 44308/2017 and also the order dtd. 15/2/2022 passed by a Division Bench in CCC Nos.772/2021, 770/2021, 771/2021 and 773/2021.

(2.) On perusal of the material placed on record shows that the said bunch of writ petitions were filed challenging the official memorandums dtd. 27/7/2017 and 15/6/2017. Vide order dtd. 23/4/2019, the learned Single Judge, considering the factual aspects, the agreement dtd. 15/12/2015 between the parties for supply of solar power and termination of the said agreement which was subject to challenge in W.P.No.51001/2016 and also considering one of the relevant prayer made by the complainants namely, for extension of time to complete the construction work, was pleased to quash the memorandums challenged in the writ petitions. The learned Single Judge further directed the accused to permit the complainants to complete the construction work within a stipulated period and also permitted the accused to carry out the inspection and to examine whether the complainants have complied with the conditions prescribed in the power purchase agreements and to proceed further with the matter in accordance with law and in case, the complainants do not comply with the terms and conditions laid down in the agreement and fail to complete the construction within a period of six months from the date of the order, the accused shall be at liberty to call for explanation from the complainants and adjudicate the same by a speaking order which shall be communicated to the complainants. Further, it was also observed that in case the complainants complete the construction work as required under the power purchase agreements, the accused shall take further action in the matter in accordance with law. The complainants were also granted liberty to approach the Karnataka State Regulatory Commission with regard to their grievance raised in the writ petitions, if so advised.

(3.) Subsequently, the complainants with a grievance of non-compliance of the order dtd. 23/4/2019 passed by the learned Single Judge, filed CCC No.772/2021 C/w CCC Nos.770/2021, 771/2021 and 773/2021. A perusal of the order dtd. 15/2/2022 shows that on that day itself, the learned counsel for the accused filed a memo on behalf of the accused along with a copy of the letter dtd. 14/2/2022. The content of the said memo was reproduced in paragraph 4 of the order dtd. 15/2/2022, which reads as under:-