BMM ISPAT LIMITED Vs. STATE LOAD DESPATCH CENTRE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has made the following prayers in the amended petition dated 3.11.2012, namely:

(2.) THE petitioner is said to have sold power after availing open access under the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Open Access in Inter -State Transmission) Regulations, 2008 (the Central Open Access Regulations) on payment of the specified charges. The petitioner has stated that the respondent suddenly started raising bills towards UI Charges for the inter -State open access availed and Back -up Power Supply (BPS) Charges and interest for the alleged non -payment/delayed payment. The details of these bills and the action by the petitioner in relation to these bills given in the petition are as under:

(3.) IT is noted that the reply on behalf of the respondent has been filed by Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. which operates the respondent even though, the respondent as a statutory body, was expected to file the reply. We are not able to understand the reason for not filing the reply by the respondent. The reply filed has, however, been taken on record as the respondent's reply as an exception to the general principle that pleadings should be filed by the parties themselves or their authorized representatives.