Gujarat High Court
Executive Engineer ( O And M ) vs M/S Shah Paper Mills Ltd on 23 January, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/188/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 188 of 2025
In
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 996 of 2018
==================================================
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ( O AND M )
Versus
M/S SHAH PAPER MILLS LTD. & ANR.
==================================================
Appearance:
MS LILU K BHAYA(1705) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS BHARGAVI K THAKAR for the Opponent(s) No. 1
MS HETAL PATEL ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Opponent(s)
No. 2
==================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA
AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 23/01/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
Heard Ms. Lilu K. Bhaya, learned counsel for the appellant and
Ms.Bhargavi K. Thakar learned counsel appearing for the respondent
no. 1 and perused the record.
2. The present application seeking for review of the judgment and
order dated 24.06.2024 has been filed on the limited ground that
liberty granted to the respondent to avail the remedy of appeal as
per Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003, may not be made
available inasmuch as, the original respondent had already availed
the remedy of appeal challenging the final assessment made by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/188/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/01/2025
undefined
competent authority.
2.1. The challenge before the writ Court was both to the final bill as
also the order dated 08.09.2016 passed by the appellate authority.
This fact has been missed by the Court while issuing final direction in
paragraph '20' of the judgment under review.
3. Taking note of the facts recorded in paragraphs '2' and '19' of
the judgment under review, we may record that the order passed by
the appellate authority dated 08.09.2016 whereby the appeal filed by
the original respondent/consumer has been upheld by the writ Court
with the judgment and order dated 21.08.2017. By the judgment
under review dated 24.06.2024, while allowing the appeal, we set
aside both the orders passed by the appellate authority as also the
learned Single Judge holding that there was no illegality in the
procedure adopted by the competent authority in preparation of the
final bill in accordance with the provisions of Section 126 of the
Electricity Act, 2003.
4. We finally reached on the conclusion that the appellant is
required to provide the final bill along with the calculation sheet to
the respondent within a period of six weeks from the date of the
decision, directing therein that the respondent shall be under an
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/188/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/01/2025
undefined
obligation to make payment within a period of four weeks from the
date of receipt of the final bill.
5. For the fact brought before us that the remedy of appeal under
Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 has already been availed by
the respondent no. 1 and the order passed by the appellate authority
is set aside, there is no question of granting further liberty to the
respondent to raise the challenge in the second round.
4.1. Insofar as the final bill which was the subject matter of the
appeal has been set aside by the appellate authority vide order dated
08.09.2016, once affirmed, no further challenge can be allowed to be
raised.
5. We, therefore, find it fit to modify the directions contained in
paragraph '20' of the judgment under review by deleting the
direction that "the respondent would be at liberty to avail the remedy
of appeal as per Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and the
order passed in the instant appeal shall not come in its way".
6. We further provide that the appellant shall serve the final bill
upon the respondent within a further period of six weeks from today
and on receipt therein, the respondent shall be under an obligation
to make payment within a further period of four weeks, failing which
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/188/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/01/2025
undefined
it would be open for the appellant to take appropriate recourse for
recovery.
6.1. As regard the contention of the learned counsel for the
respondent no. 1 that liberty may be granted to raise any dispute
pertaining to the computation made in the final bill to be served upon
the respondent under the direction issued by us, suffice it to note
that any issue pertaining to computation can only be arithmetical and
the respondent no. 1 shall be at liberty to raise further challenge to
the computation made by the appellant. However, the dispute
pertaining to the calculation which would be arithmetical can be
raised by the respondent only after making entire deposit within the
time given above. In case of failure by the respondent in making the
deposit within the time given above, no further dispute would be
permitted to be raised.
7. With the above modification in the final directions contained in
paragraph '20' of the judgment and order dated 24.06.2024 under
review, we dispose of the review application.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J)
phalguni
