MITTAL UDHYOG Vs. JODHPUR VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of these writ petitions, the petitioners entrepreneurs, operating manufacturing units, have questioned legality of the notices 6.6.13 issued by the Assistant Engineer (Distribution), Jodhpur Discom, Rawatsar, whereby the petitioners have been directed to remain present before the said authority on the date specified to raise the objections, if any, in respect of the recovery of the demand quantified.

(2.) AS per the case set out by the petitioners in the petition filed, the recovery is sought to be effected on account of defect in the meter installed at their premises. However, a perusal of the impugned notices reveal that the demand is sought to be raised by the respondents towards the cost of Line/Sub Station. According to the petitioners, the POP Association, Baramsar Rawatsar filed objections against the demand sought to be raised as aforesaid, but to no avail.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the impugned demand is raised by the respondent -JVVNL unilaterally after a lapse of so many years without extending an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, which is violative of principles of natural justice. Learned counsel submitted that without there being any finding regarding the irregularities having been committed by the petitioners, the demand raised is absolutely unjustified. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners had no opportunity to question the legality of the audit objection and therefore, the demand raised solely on the basis of audit objection is not sustainable in the eyes of law.