The Managing Director vs M/S.Southern Ferro Ltd
2021 Latest Caselaw 2323 Kant

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED THIS THE 22nd DAY OF JUNE 2021

                            PRESENT

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

                               AND

  THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

            Writ Appeal No.100077/2021 (GM-KEB)

Between

1. The Managing Director
   Hubli Electricity Supply Company Limited,
   Corporate Office,
   Navanagar P.B.Road,
   Hubballi-580025.

2. The General Manager (Technical)
   HESCOM, Navanagar
   P.B.Road,
   Hubballi-580025.

3. The Executive Engineer (Electrical)
   HESCOM, Tabib Land,
   Hubballi-580025.

4. The Assistant Executive Engineer
   (Electrical), City Sub Division-3,
   HESCOM, Industrial Estate,
   Hubballi-580025.                            ...Appellants

(By Sri. B.S. Kamate, Advocate)
                                 2




And

1. M/s. Southern Ferro Ltd.,
   Industrial Estate Gokul Road,
   Hubballi
   Rep. By Its Executive Director
   Shri.Sandeep Bidasaria
   S/O. Sri. Murarilal Bidasaria
   Age. Major, Res. Hubballi-580025.

2. The State Of Karnataka
   Rep. By Its Secretary To Government
   Department Of Energy
   Vikas Soudha,
   Dr.Ambedkar Road,
   Bengaluru-560001

3. The Chief Electrical Inspector
   To Government Of Karnataka
   Nirman Bhavan,
   2nd Floor, Rajajinagar,
   Bengaluru-560010

4. The Dy.Chief Electrical Inspector
   Dharwad Region,
   Sanmathi Marg
   Dharwad-580001.                             ...Respondents

(By Sri. G.K.Hiregoudar, Government Advocate for R2 & R3)

      This Writ Appeal is filed under Section 4 of Karnataka High
Court Act, 1961, praying this Hon'ble Court to, set aside the
impugned order dated 15.3.2021 passed by the learned single
Judge in W.P.No.105054/2017 and to dismiss the writ petition by
allowing this writ appeal with cost in the interest of justice.

      This Writ Appeal coming on for Preliminary Hearing this
day, Krishna S.Dixit, J, delivered the following:
                                  3




                             JUDGMENT

This intra-court appeal by the Managing Director of Hubli

Electricity Supply Company Limited & its Officials seek to lay a

challenge to the Judgment & Order dated 15.03.2021 handed

by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.

No.105054/2017, whereby relief has been granted to the writ

petitioner as under:

"27. I am, therefore, of the view that the demand made by HESCOM by computing the tax at the rate at which it was selling electricity to its consumers cannot be the basis for levying and collecting the electricity tax. Annexure-A is, therefore, quashed. HESCOM shall now calculate the electricity tax at the rate at which the petitioner had purchased the electricity from Open Access Source and issue a revised demand within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

28. The amounts, if any, deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the interim orders granted by this Court shall be adjusted and if there is any sum in excess, the same may be refunded to the petitioner. If, on the other hand, further sums to be paid by the petitioner, petitioner shall pay the same within a period of two weeks from the date of demand."

2. On request, learned Government advocate having

accepted notice for the second respondent-State Government,

although supported the case of the appellants and after

knowing the mind of the Court, submits that an appeal by the

State is also contemplated and that liberty in this regard needs

to be reserved.

3. Having heard the matter, we decline indulgence for

the following reasons:

(a) The structure of the impugned order and more

particularly, the text of its operative portion which is

reproduced above show that the dispute as to levy &

computation of tax is essentially between the State

Government on the one hand and the writ petitioner-

company on the other; the dispute is governed by the

provisions of the Karnataka Electricity (Taxation on

Consumption or Sale) Act, 1959; Section 3 is the charging

provision; it provides for levy of tax on the consumption of

electricity; tax is levied on ad valorem basis at 6% of the

electricity consumption charges or sale value;

(b) Section 4 enacts duty of the licencee i.e. the appellant-

HESCOM to collect the tax from the consumer of electricity

and to make over such collection to the State

Government; thus, HESCOM is nothing but only a tax

recovery agent, of course, statutorily constituted; thus, in

no way it is adversely affected by the impugned order, the

truly aggrieved being the State Government to whom the

tax is payable; therefore, the appellants lack the locus

standii.

In the above circumstances, this appeal is liable to be and

accordingly rejected without prejudice to the right of the State

Government and its Machineries to call in question the

impugned Judgment & Order; in this regard all contentions are

kept open.

All pending applications pale into insignificance in view of

disposal of the main matter.

SD/-

JUDGE

SD/-

JUDGE

Kms