MARDIA CHEMICALS LIMITED Vs. GUJARAT ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . Both these appeals are directed against the common order dated 22nd March 2002 of the Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (hereinafter referred to as `the Commission') passed in Petition No. 63 of 2002 and Petition No. 64 of 2002, whereby the Commission rejected the applications of the appellant seeking stay of the operation and execution of the notice dated 30th January 2002 issued by the Gujarat Electricity Board under section 24(1) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act of 1910'), on the ground that the Commission had no jurisdiction to grant such relief under the provisions of the Electricity Regulatory Commission's Act, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as `the said Act'). Since the interim relief prayed for in the two Petitions No. 63 and 64 of 2002 was identical, the Commission heard and disposed of both the petitions together, upholding the preliminary objection raised on behalf of the respondent - Board against its jurisdiction.

(2.) . The appellant is a Registered Company engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of chemicals. The Commission, constituted under the said Act, had earlier on being moved by the Gujarat Electricity Board for fixation of tariffs for various categories of consumers, made a Tariff Order dated 10/10/2000 in Case No. 19 of 1999 determining the tariffs for various consumer categories, including HTP-IV category. While those proceedings were undertaken by the Commission in exercise of its functions under section 22 of the said Act, the appellant Company had asked for a special tariff by Application No. 15 of 1999 filed on 4/06/1999. In para 9.8.8 of the Tariff Order dated 10th October 2000, the request of the appellant for a special tariff was rejected by the Commission.

(3.) . On 5th February 2002, the appellant preferred Petition No. 63 of 2002 before the Commission praying for quashing the said notice dated 30th January 2002 and also seeking interim relief therein against disconnection of the power supply on the ground of the non-payment of the dues demanded in the notice. In the application, it was alleged that the electric supply was being cut off at the instance of a rival and the action was therefore malafide and that the question whether the appellant was a Sick Company was under consideration before the B.I.F.R.