Bombay High Court
Maharashtra State Road Transport ... vs Maharashtra State Electricity ... on 4 September, 2023
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote, Urmila Sachin Phalke
2023:BHC-NAG:13119-DB
26.wp.1266.22.odt 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.1266 OF 2022
(M.S.R.T.C. Vs. M.S.E.D.C.L.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. A.S. Mehadia, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. S.V. Purohit, Advocate for the respondent.
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE &
URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, JJ.
DATED : SEPTEMBER 04, 2023
Heard.
2. The petition challenges the communication
dated 28/01/2022 issued by the respondent demanding
an amount of Rs.1,55,43,716.84/- against the tariff
difference for the period from August, 2012 to October,
2021 by the Bill dated 04/02/2022 and so also the notice
of disconnection dated 19/02/2022.
3. The matter regarding disconnection and
demand is now squarely covered by the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of K.C. Ninan Vs. Kerala
State Electricity Board and ors. [2023 SCC OnLine SC
663] which held as under :
"134. The period of limitation under Section
56(2) is relatable to the sum due under Section 56.
The sum due under Section 56 relates to the sum
due on account of the negligence of a person to pay
for electricity. Section 56(2) provides that such sum
due would not be recoverable after the period of
two years from when such sum became first due.
The means of recovery provided under Section 56
relate to the remedy of disconnection of electric
supply. The right to recover still subsists.
136. We therefore, reject the submission of
the auction purchasers that the recovery of
outstanding electricity arrears either by instituting a
civil suit against the erstwhile consumer or from a
subsequent transferee in exercise of statutory power
under the relevant conditions of supply is barred on
the ground of limitation under Section 56(2) of the
2003 Act. Accordingly, while the bar of limitation
under Section 56(2) restricts the remedy of
disconnection under Section 56, the licensee is
entitled to recover electricity arrears through civil
remedies or in exercise of its statutory power under
the conditions of supply."
4. The issue also has been concluded by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in terms of para 341 of which Clause
(h) is material.
5. It is, therefore, apparent that the threat of
disconnection cannot be administered by the respondent -
utility, for arrears, which are due beyond a period of two
years, for which it may be open for the respondent -
utility to take appropriate proceedings as permissible in
law. This would equally apply to all the establishments of
the petitioner wherever they are situated in the State of
Maharashtra and it is expected that the respondent -
utility will deal with them in accordance with what has
been stated in para 134 in K.C. Ninan (supra).
6. In the light of the aforesaid position, the
petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.
7. We expect the respondent - utility, to circulate
a short circular indicating what is the effect of K.C. Ninan
(supra) by the Hon'ble Apex Court so that unnecessary
litigation on that count can be avoided.
(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)
*Divya
Signed by: Mrs. Divya Baldwa
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 04/09/2023 18:39:14
