TATA YODOGAWA LIMITED Vs. JHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The present review application is directed against the order dated 2.5.2013 (modified vide order dated 7.5.2013) passed in C.W.J.C. No. 852 of 2000(R) and has been preferred by the writ petitioner. In the writ petition the petitioner had sought quashing of the tariff for the consumers of the induction furnace contained in the Electricity Board's internal communication dated 24.9.1999 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) whereby a new tariff for consumers of induction furnace was levied w.e.f. 1.9.1999 and to implement the said tariff schedule for billing purpose for the consumer having induction furnace for the month of December 1999 onwards. As such it was prayed that the respondents cannot enforce such tariff schedule for induction furnace, consequently no bill can be raised on the basis thereof w.e.f. any date what so ever. Further prayer was made for a declaration that otherwise also the aforesaid tariff schedule for induction furnace contained in Annexure-5 to writ application prepared on the basis of consensus between electricity board and Bihar Steel Manufacturer Association is not applicable to the petitioner on the grounds taken therein. The petitioner had further prayed for quashing of the letter dated 30.9.1999 issued by the respondents directing it to execute a fresh agreement for induction furnace installed in its premises as also the letter dated 16.3.2000, whereby it was directed to segregate the load of the induction furnace from other loads. The provisional supplementary bill dated 16.3.2000 for Rs. 32,13,848/- for the month of January-February, 2000 raised on the basis of the aforesaid new tariff schedule of induction furnace was also challenged where under the Respondent-

(3.) Learned Sr. Counsel Mr. N.K. Poddar who had appeared on behalf of the writ petitioner, at the outset very fairly and categorically submitted that the petitioner had initially challenged the vires of the tariff for the consumers of the induction furnace contained in the Board's internal communication dated 24.9.1999(Annexure-5) and the retrospective application of the said tariff w.e.f 1.9.1999 but the petitioner had abandoned the said prayer made in para 1(i) of the writ application as has also been recorded in the order dated 14.9.2007 passed in the said writ application. Learned Sr. counsel, therefore, confined himself to the sole question whether the tariff schedule communicated by the Bihar State Electricity Board(B.S.E.B.) vide Annexure-5 dated 24.9.1999 was applicable to the petitioner or not and consequently, whether the bills raised by Annexure-13 dated 16.3.2000 for a sum of Rs. 32,13,848/- for the month of January February, 2000 were fit to be quashed. It is relevant to point out herein that the gazette notification dated 15.3.2000 which apparently was published on 6.4.2000 was brought on record as Annexure-C to the counter affidavit filed by the respondent- Board . However, no challenge to the gazette notification dated 15.3.2000 notified on 6.4.2000 was made on behalf of the petitioner during the entire course of the proceeding of the writ petition.