RAMKRISHNA FORGING LIMITED Vs. JHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ for quashing the order as contained in letter dated 8.11.2007 issued by the Electrical Superintending Engineer, Jamshedpur, whereby he has refused to reduce the contract demand of the petitioner from 4000 KVA to 1325 KVA on the basis of Clause 9(b) of the High Tension Agreement and further for a direction to the respondents to immediately reduce the load of the petitioner's unit from 4000 KVA to 1325 KVA on the basis of application made by the petitioner on 20.09.2007.

(2.) PETITIONER 's case inter alia is that it is a small scale industry having several units at Adityapur (Jamshedpur) and the instant case pertains to Plant 3 and 4 situated by the side at Phase -VII of the Industrial area at Adityapur. In 2004 petitioner entered into an agreement with the Jharkhand State Electricity Board (in short 'the Board') on 14.04.2004 for High Tension connection having connected load of 325 KVA. According to the petitioner, because of continuous demand of products of the petitioner, it decided to enhance its production and as such applied for enhancement of its load from 325 KVA to 1325 KVA which was allowed by the General Manager -cum -Chief Engineer of the Board on 14.3.2006. An agreement to that effect was entered into between the petitioner and the respondent -Board for enhanced load of 1325 KVA. Again in the 2006 itself, petitioner further made a request to the Board for enhancement of load from 1325 KVA to 3500 KVA which was duly allowed by the General Manager -cum -Chief Engineer of the Board vide letter dated 26.12.2006. Again on the request of the petitioner, further load of 500 KVA was sanctioned and an agreement to that effect was entered into between the petitioner and the respondent -Board on 07.7.2007 for supply of 4000 KVA in the unit of the petitioner. However, the petitioner alleged that after enhancement of load from 3500 to 4000 KVA, petitioner was facing major power trippings as well as continuous load shedding which was affecting the costly machineries and, therefore, the petitioner decided to reduce the load from 4000 KVA to 1325 KVA. Accordingly, petitioner made an application on 20.9.2007 before the authority of the respondent -Board for reduction of contract demand from 4000 KVA to 1325 KVA. The said letter was followed by another letter dated 05.10.2007. The said application was rejected by the Electrical Superintending Engineer and the same was communicated vide letter dated 8.11.2007 informing the petitioner that from the date of enhancement of supply, the agreement is enforced for a period of three years and if at all, the petitioner decides to terminate the agreement, in that event the petitioner is to bear the liability of three years i.e. the petitioner will have to pay the minimum guarantee charges and other charges for the remaining period of the agreement. The petitioner's case is that the Board cannot refuse to reduce the load, especially when the Board is unable to supply energy an per requirement of the petitioner, failing which the petitioner would have no option but the close down its unit, rather to avail the electric supply from the Board.

(3.) THE first agreement entered into between the petitioner and the Board for a contract demand of 325 KVA is dated 16.4.2004 a copy of which has been annexed as annexure -1 to the writ petition. The last agreement entered into between the parties was 07.7.2007 for a contract demand of 4000 KVA by enhancing load from 35100 KVA. A copy of the said agreement has been annexed as annexure 5 to the writ petition. Clause 9(a) and (b) of the agreement read as under: