Kerala High Court
Atlas Celestial Park Apartment ... vs Kerala State Electricity Board ... on 2 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 10495 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
ATLAS CELESTIAL PARK APARTMENT OWNERS ASSOCIATION,
REG.NO.EKM/TC/885/2014, N.S.S.JUNCTION,
NAYATHODE P.O., NEDUMBASSERY,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683 572
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SHRI.SAJITH JOHN.
BY ADVS.
LAL K.JOSEPH
SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (THURAVOOR)
SMT.T.A.LUXY
SHRI.SURESH SUKUMAR
SRI.ANZIL SALIM
SHRI.MANUEL K.M.
SHRI.SETHU KRISHNA R.S.
SHRI.CHACKO MATHEWS K.
SMT.NOORUNISSA K.A.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
VYDHYUDHIBHAVANAM, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 004
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, PERUMBAVOOR,
PIN - 683 542.
3 THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD., ELECTRICAL
SECTION, KALADY, PIN - 683 574.
4 THE CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SHANTHI NAGAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
2
5 ATLAS GOLD TOWNSHIPS(INDIA) PRIVATE LTD.
NEAR FEDERAL BANK, VAPPALASSERRY P.O., ANGAMALY,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683 572 REPRESENTED BY RESOLUTION
PROFESSIONAL, JASIN JOSE.
BY ADVS.
SUDHEER GANESH KUMAR.R.
B.PRAMOD
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 02.12.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).25548/2021, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 25548 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
ATLAS CELESTIAL PARK APARTMENT OWNERS ASSOCIATION,
REG NO. EKM/TC/885/2014,
N.S.S. JUNCTION, NAYATHODE P.O.,
NEDUMBASSERY, ERNAKULAM 683 572,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SHRI. SAJITH JOHN.
BY ADVS.
LAL K.JOSEPH
P.MURALEEDHARAN (THURAVOOR)
T.A.LUXY
SURESH SUKUMAR
ANZIL SALIM
CHACKO MATHEWS K.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD -
VYDHYUDHIBHAVANAM, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 004,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD,
ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, PERUMBAVOOR, 683 542.
3 THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER,
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD,
ELECTRICAL SECTION, KALADY 683 574.
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
4
4 THE CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR,
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SHANTHI NAGAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
5 ATLAS GOLD TOWNSHIPS (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD,
NEAR FEDERAL BANK , VAPPALLASSERRY P.O., ANGAMALY,
ERNAKULAM 683 572, REPRESENTED BY RESOLUTION
PROFESSIONAL JASIN JOSE.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 02.12.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).10495/2021, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
5
AMIT RAWAL, J.
------------------------------------
WP(C) Nos.10495 and 25548 of 2021
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2022
JUDGMENT
This judgment of mine shall dispose of two writ
petitions, namely WP(C) Nos.10495 and 25548 of 2021,
preferred by the very same petitioner. For the sake of
convenience, hereinafter, WP(C) No.10495/2021 will be
called as the first writ petition, and WP(C) No.25548/2021
as the second writ petition.
2. The reliefs sought for in the first writ petition are
as follows:
"i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate
Writ or Order quashing Ext-P5 communication dated
10/3/2021 to the extent it insists for the re submission
of the Compliance Report & Completion Report by the
5th respondent,
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate
Writ or Order directing the respondents 1 to 4 to accept
the, Compliance Report & Completion Report for the
temporary installation of 500KVA DG set submitted by
the petitioners and such other applications which are
deemed necessary to provide electric connections
separately to the apartment owners in the residential
complex of the petitioner and for effective
implementation of Ext.P3 Scheme within a specific time
frame.
iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate
Writ or Order directing the respondents 1 to 4 not to
insist for arrears of electricity charges from the
petitioner for the purpose of granting electric connection
to each apartment owners, while implementing Exhibt
P3 Scheme.
iv) Declare that the petitioner is not liable to pay the
arrears of electricity charges demanded against the 5th
respondent in Ext P8."
Likewise, following are the reliefs sought for in the second
writ petition:
"i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ
or order quashing Ext.P10 and Ext.P11,
ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate
Writ or Order directing the respondents 1 to 4 to
implement Ext. P3 Scheme for grant of LT connections
to the individual owners of the petitioner in view of Exts.
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
P2 and P4 within a specific time frame.
iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate
Writ or Order directing the respondents 1 to 4 not to
insist for arrears of electricity charges covered by Ext
P10 and Ext P11 from the petitioner for the purpose of
granting electric connection to each apartment owners,
while implementing Exhibit P3 Scheme."
3. Insofar as the first and second prayers in the first
writ petition are concerned, they had been taken care of by
this Court by granting interim order dated 27.4.2021, which
reads as under:
"Admit.
The learned Government Pleader takes
notice for R4. The learned Standing Counsel
takes notice for R1 to R3. Issue notice to R5.
Since by Ext.P7, the 5th respondent has
become incapable of making any application,
petitioner, as a body of apartment owners are
permitted to submit compliance report and
completion report and all other applications on
behalf of the 5th respondent. To enable the
petitioner to do the above, Ext.P5 shall stand
stayed until further orders."
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
As far as relief no.(iv) in the first writ petition is concerned,
which is for a declaration that the petitioner is not liable to
pay the arrears of electricity charges demanded against the
5th respondent in Ext.P8, the same has been put at rest for
the reason that by virtue of the judgment, produced as
Ext.P4 in the first writ petition, rendered by a Division Bench
of this Court in W.A.No.1673/2019 dated 29.1.2021, the
individual owners have been issued LT connections and have
also submitted a Bank Guarantee (produced as Ext.P14 in
the first writ petition) in terms of the provisions of sub-
Regulation (3) of Regulation 40 of the Electricity Supply
Code, 2014.
4. In the second writ petition, the prayer of the
petitioner is only for restraining the respondents from
demanding the arrears from them.
5. This case has a checkered history, which has been
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
taken care of and noted extensively by a learned Single
Judge of this Court in Ext.P1 order dated 23.11.2017 in
WP(C) No.15370/2017 and a Division Bench of this Court in
Ext.P4 judgment dated 29.1.2021 in W.A.No.1817/2019 and
connected cases. The Division Bench considering the
predicament of the petitioner therein noted the following
observations:-
"19. In the instant case, none had applied
seeking permission for a single point supply as
contemplated under the provisions mentioned
above. The original application, on the basis of
which HT connection was initially granted, a
copy of which was produced by the learned
Standing Counsel, pursuant to the direction of
this Court, shows that the application was
made on 01.10.2015 for three buildings bearing
Nos.XIV/188A1 for an area of 286.58 sq.m,
Nos.XIV/188A2, for an area of 162.44 sq.m and
building No. XIV/188A3 for an area of 15.03
sq.m. In the tariff category shown in the
approval order, there are overwritings and
erasures, that are visible even in the
photocopy. On the basis of an application for
three apartments in the apartment complex, HT
connection is stated to have been given for the
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
entire complex for all the apartments. It raises
doubts on the manner in which such
connections were provided. None of the
individual apartment owners, other than the
three building numbers mentioned earlier, had
ever applied independently for the grant of HT
connection to their respective apartments. In
such circumstances, we are of the view that the
initial grant of HT connection to the apartment
complex constructed by the 4th respondent
bearing the name 'Atlas Celestial Park' was not
legally valid."
It is contended that the Bank Guarantee has been submitted
later on, for, the respondent-Electricity Board had been
insisting the petitioner for clearing of the arrears. Though
Bank Guarantee deemed to have been submitted under
protest strictly in compliance of the provisions of sub-
Regulation (3) of Regulation 40 of the Electricity Supply
Code, but the fact remains that during the interregnum,
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code proceedings were initiated
against the builder, Atlas Gold Township (India) Private Ltd.,
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
and Resolution Professional has been appointed. In one of
the communications submitted by the petitioner to the
Resolution Professional, it surfaced that the KSEB had
preferred a claim in respect of the arrears of electricity of
the erstwhile Company.
6. It is discerned that once KSEB had taken steps for
recovery, arrears cannot be recovered from the petitioner.
Period of three years is to be reckoned from the date of
submission of the claim before the Resolution Professional.
Sub-Regulation (3) of Regulation 40 reads as under:
"40. Recovery of arrears relating to the
previous consumer.-
xxx xxx xxx
(3) If a purchaser or lessee or occupier of
such premises requires a new connection, as
the earlier connection given to the previous
consumer in that premises has already been
disconnected and dismantled on the ground of
outstanding dues of the previous consumer,
new connection shall not be denied to such
purchaser or lessee or occupier of the premises
provided he furnishes a deposit which shall be
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
equal to the arrears of electricity charges and
other liabilities if any, excluding interest
thereon, till the licensee obtains from the
appropriate legal forum an order on the
recovery of arrears and other liabilities or till
the licensee settles the arrears and liabilities
with the previous consumer or till completion of
three years whichever is less:
Provided that on obtaining order from the
appropriate legal forum on the recovery of such
arrears of electricity charges and other
liabilities, or on settlement of the arrears and
liabilities by the licensee with previous
consumer or on completion of three years as
aforesaid, the licensee shall release the entire
amount of deposit furnished by such owner or
lessee or occupier of the premises, along with
interest at bank rate as on the date of
furnishing such deposit."
On scrutiny of the aforementioned Regulation, it is evident
that once the licensee has taken steps to recover arrears,
the period of three years will have to be reckoned from the
date when the step is taken. After completion of three years
from the date on which the step has been taken, the
petitioner shall be entitled to seek release of the entire
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
amount of the deposit, in view of the proviso to sub-
Regulation (3), which mandates the licensee to release the
entire amount of deposit furnished by the owner or occupier
of the premises along with interest as on the date of
submission of the claim before the Resolution Professional.
Therefore, the demand raised by the respondents for
claiming the arrears is not sustainable and is liable to be
quashed and, at best, to be kept in abeyance for a period of
three years.
7. It is then contended that during the pendency of
these writ petitions supervening facts occurred, which
necessitated the petitioner to prefer I.A. No.2/2022 in the
first writ petition reflecting furnishing of Ext.P14 Bank
Guarantee on 15.6.2022 and Ext.P16 demand notice dated
27.7.2022 and Ext.P17 reply dated 3.8.2022. The petitioner
submitted Ext.P15 application dated 24.2.2022 for renewal
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
of the licence for working of the lift/escalator at the
premises and deposited a sum of Rs.13,230/- on 24.2.2021.
The respondents responded to the aforementioned request
vide Ext.P16 communication dated 27.7.2022 stating that a
sum of Rs.5,61,592/- is due as the arrears on account of the
periodical inspection of electrical installations at the
premises, which had not been remitted and called upon the
petitioner to remit the same into the Government Treasury
or through on-line under a specific head, failing which the
electric connection to the premises will be disconnected
without further notice. The petitioner responded to the
aforementioned communication vide Ext.P17 dated 3.8.2022
pointing out the facts that the builder company is non-
existent and is under liquidation process in NCLT; KSEB has
already filed a claim for the arrears before the NCLT; and
there is already an interim order passed in the first writ
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
petition from which it was understood that the builder has
become incapacitated from making any application and
therefore, permission be granted to the petitioner to submit
the compliance report and application, if any, on behalf of
the builder. Despite that the respondents are insisting the
petitioner for remittance of periodical inspection charges. As
per the provisions of Regulation 43 of Central Electricity
Authority (Measures relating to Safety and Electricity
Supply) Regulations, 2010, the Electrical Inspector is
required to conduct an inspection to ensure that electric
supply line or apparatus of voltage exceeding 650 V are
placed in position, properly joined, duly completed and
examined and only thereafter if all the measures are in tact
for the purpose of safety and achievement of the provisions
of the Act, shall submit a report for commencement of the
supply. The said provision would not be applicable, for the
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
reason that the HT connection with consumer Code 8/7135
was not issued to the petitioner-Association, but was in the
name of the builder-Company in respect of three flats, which
was disconnected and there is no challenge to the same;
whereas the members of the petitioner-Association have
been given separate LT connections, for which Bank
Guarantee has been submitted. Thus, for all intents and
purposes, the petitioner does not require, as per the
provisions of the Regulation aforementioned, inspection of
the Electrical Inspector. The said exercise is already over. It
is not a case of recommencement of the supply. In other
words, supplies were different. HT supply was only with
regard to three flats, whereas LT supply is for all the
individual flat owners.
8. On the other hand, Mr.Pramod, learned Standing
Counsel appearing on behalf of the KSEB, submitted that the
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
predicament of the KSEB is writ large as there had been a
tussle between the association and the builder. The builder
had not submitted compliance report nor had strictly
complied with the provisions of Regulation 49, providing the
builder to construct the internal distribution network,
including the service line, transformer, switchgear etc., as
per the scheme approved. The scheme was approved. But
the builder made default in making the actual or minimum
consumption charges of HT connections. It was in that
circumstances, demand as per the provisions of Regulation
40 of the Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014 was raised.
LT consumers cannot seek waiver of the arrears of electricity
charges, which has become due from the premises from its
members while implementing Ext.P3 scheme. The HT
connection with consumer Code 8/7135 was dismantled
strictly in terms of the judgment in W.A.No.1673/2019 and
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
connected cases for the purpose of regularisation of the
entire connections as per the Scheme (Ext.P3) approved by
the Electrical Inspector on 22.7.2015, by the individual
owners of the apartment. The arrears due on account of
dismantling of HT connection as on 29.6.2021 are
Rs.17,66,091/- along with interest as on 10.3.2021, which
pertains to defaulted charges payable by the consumers of
the apartment complex. In fact, the petitioner has stepped
into the shoes of the builder, nor is there any change of the
premises or the occupants. The security deposit of
Rs.11,59,300/- with the KSEB by the builder had already
been adjusted. Since the connections are actually
reconnection of the disconnected connections of the
premises, payment of all dues have to be paid by the
consumer. All these circumstances justify the demand.
Sri.Pramod also submitted that even though the arrears
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
were due since long, no delay can be attributed to the KSEB
for raising the demand for the reason that owing to the
Covid pandemic and subsequent stay orders granted by
various courts, the demand was not raised.
9. In rebuttal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner submitted that even though the arrears are
with effect from 2015, but after adjusting the deposit, the
actual arrears are with effect from 2019. If at all the KSEB
has any grievance, they could have raised this point in Writ
Appeal, which came to be decided only on 29.1.2021.
10. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
11. From the operative part of the judgment of this
Court dated 29.1.2021 rendered in W.A.No.1673/2019 and
connected cases, direction was issued to the KSEB to
approve the Scheme which has actually been approved on
the basis of the report dated 22.7.2016 of the Chief
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
Electrical Inspector. Petitioner has deposited the required
charges for energisation of the electric connections. The HT
connection issued in favour of the builder was dismantled.
Now, the question which arises is "whether the demand of
the KSEB for claiming the arrears from the petitioner is
justified or is in accordance with the provisions of the Act
and the Regulations". On perusal of the sub-Regulation (3)
of Regulation 40, it is clear that the licensee is empowered
to claim the arrears by resorting to a legal remedy and till
realisation of the same, while releasing the connection to the
other occupiers of the building, for protecting the interest, it
can always ask to furnish guarantee. The petitioner has
already submitted a Guarantee in terms of the
aforementioned Regulation. The contents of the e-mail
dated 8.11.2021 [Ext.P7(b) in the second writ petition]
reveals that the KSEB has already submitted a claim before
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
the Resolution Professional appointed for managing the
affairs of the Company which is under insolvency
proceedings before the competent court. Thus, for all
intents and purposes, respondents have already taken the
steps to recover the arrears and the period of three years
shall be reckoned from the date on which such steps were
taken. Till such time, the interest of the KSEB is to be
protected. As per the proviso to the aforementioned sub-
Regulation (3), even in the absence of any settlement of the
liabilities, the licensee is mandatorily required to release the
Bank Guarantee after the expiry of the three years. Thus, in
my view, the demand of the arrears raised by the
respondents from the petitioner is not sustainable and
hereby ordered to be kept in abeyance till the expiry of the
three years, which is to be reckoned from the date of claim
before the Resolution Professional.
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
12. As far as the claim with regard to energisation of
the lift is concerned, the same was operational at the time
when the LT connections were issued. An application for
renewal has already been submitted. But, the respondents
are again pressing for the arrears. In view of the findings
hereinabove, once the interest of the respondents has been
protected, they are directed to renew the licence for
energisation of the lift/escalator within a period of one
month, without asking for the report of the Electrical
Inspector as the provisions of Regulation 43 of the Central
Electricity Authority (Measures relating to Safety and
Electricity Supply) Regulations, 2010, do not envisage any
situation for the inspection of the Electrical Inspector being
not the case of re-energisation of the connection, as the
dismandling was of only HT connection, which still remains
disconnected. Regulation 43 is extracted hereinbelow:
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
"43. Approval by Electrical Inspector. -
(1) Voltage above which electrical
installations will be required to be inspected by
the Electrical Inspector before commencement
of supply or recommencement after shutdown
for six months and above shall be as per the
notification to be issued by the Appropriate
Government, under clause (x) of sub-section
(2) of section 176, and sub-section (1) of
section 162 of the Act.
(2) Before making an application to the
Electrical Inspector for permission to
commence or recommence supply after an
installation has been disconnected for six
months and above at voltage exceeding 650 V
to any person, the supplier shall ensure that
electric supply lines or apparatus of voltage
exceeding 650 V belonging to him are placed in
position, properly joined and duly completed
and examined and the supply of electricity shall
not be commenced by the supplier for
installations of voltage needing inspection
under these regulations unless the provisions
of regulations 12 to 29, 33 to 35, 44 to 51 and
55 to 77 have been complied with and the
approval in writing of the Electrical Inspector
has been obtained by him: Provided that the
supplier may energise the aforesaid electric
supply lines or apparatus for the purpose of
tests specified in regulation 46.
(3) The owner of any installation of
voltage exceeding 650 V shall, before making
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
application to the Electrical Inspector for
approval ofhis installation or additions thereto,
test every circuit of voltage exceeding 650 V or
additions thereto, other than an overhead line,
and satisfy himself that they withstand the
application of the testing voltage set out in
sub-regulation (1) of regulation 46 and shall
duly record the results of such tests and
forward them to the Electrical Inspector:
Provided that an Electrical lnspector may
direct such owner to carry out such tests as he
deems necessary or accept the manufacturer's
certified tests in respect of any particular
apparatus in place of the tests required by this
regulation.
(4) The owner of any installation of
voltage exceeding 650 V who makes any
addition or alteration to his installation shall
not connect to the supply his apparatus or
electric supply lines, comprising the said
alterations or additions unless and until such
alteration or addition has been approved in
writing by the Electrical Inspector."
For renewal of the licence, the inspection of the Electrical
Inspector may be required. The Electrical Inspector, cannot,
in view of the Government Order dated 27.3.2019 insist for
the payment being the employee of the Government. KSEB
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
will forward the request of the petitioner to the Electrical
Inspector for inspection of the area where the lift is installed
and submit status report. After submission of the report
within a period of 15 days from the communication sent by
the petitioner, within another 30 days, the respondents will
renew the licence for the lift by overcoming deficiency, if
any.
13. This Court is also takes note of the fact that any
compliance of the Scheme which remains pending be
completed as expeditiously as possible, subject to the
satisfaction of the Rules and Regulations.
The Writ Petitions are disposed of as above.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
jg
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25548/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDERS DATED
23/11/2017 IN WPC 15370/17.
Exhibit P1 (A) TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDERS DATED
7/12//2017 IN WPC 23730/2017.
Exhibit P1 (B) TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDERS DATED
16/1/2018 IN WPC 23730/2017.
Exhibit P1 (C) TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDERS DATED
5/2/2018 IN WPC 23730/2017.
Exhibit P1 (D) TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDERS DATED
5/7/2018 IN WPC 23730/2017.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED
20/2/2020 IN WPC NO 21563/18 PC
23739/17, WPC 15370/17.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTRICAL SCHEME
APPROVED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT ON
22.07.2015.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A. NOS.
1673 OF 2019 , 1743 OF 2019 1817 OF 2019
ALONG WITH ANOTHER W.A. 20 OF 2020.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. B3-
34445/19/EIE DATED 10/3/2021 SIGNED BY
THE ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPANY MASTER DATED OF
M/S. ATLAS GOLD TOWN SHIP (INDIA) PVT.
LTD.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.1.2019
PASSED BY NCLT IN TIBA/19/KOB/19.
Exhibit P7 (A) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30/7/2021
IN I.A/82/KOB/2020.
Exhibit P7 (B) TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED 8/11/201
ISSUED BY THE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL
MR. JASIN.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED 8/11/2021
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
ISSUED COMMUNICATION NO. ECP/T4/HT/ATLAS
GOLD/2021-22/17 DATED 05.04.2021.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
27/5/2021 IN WPC NO. 10495/21.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO. B.O.
(FTD) NO. 822/2021 (D) (D &IT) /D-
2/GOVT. /SC/19-20/0019/2021-22 DATED
03/11/2021 ISSUED BY THE COMPANY
SECRETARY (IN-CHARGE) BY THE ORDERS OF
THE FULL TIME DIRECTORS OF THE KSEBL.
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 09/11/2021
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
SECRETARY OF THE PETITIONER ASSOCIATION
BEARING NO. ECP/T4/HT-ACP
APARTMENT/2021-22/2765.
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER ISSUED BY
THE SECRETARY OF THE PETITIONER
ASSOCIATION TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
08.03.2021.
Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
25/2/2021 ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL OFFICER,
(REVENUE) UNDER THE IST RESPONDENT.
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10495/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
23/11/2017 IN WPC 15370/17.
EXHIBIT P1A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
7/12/2017 IN WPC 23730/2017.
EXHIBIT P1B TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
16/1/2018 IN WPC 23730/2017.
EXHIBIT P1C TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
5/2/2018 IN WPC 23730/2017.
EXHIBIT P1D TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
5/7/2018 IN WPC 23730/2017.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED
20/2/2020 IN WPC 23730/17.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTRICAL SCHEME
APPROVED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT ON
22/07/2015.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN
W.A.NOS.1673 OF 2019, 1743 OF 2019, 1817
OF 2019 ALONG WITH ANOTHER W.A.240 OF
2020.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.B3-
34445/19/EIE DATED 10/3/2021 SIGNED BY
THE ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPANY MASTER DATA OF
M/S.ATLAS GOLD TOWNSHIP (INDIA) PVT.LTD.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19/11/2019
PASSED BY NCLT IN TIBA/19/KOB/19.
EXHIBIT P7A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30/7/2020
IN I.A./82/KOB/2020.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION
NO.ECP/T4/HT/ATLAS GOLD/2021-22/17 DATED
05/04/2021.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE EMAILS DATED 5.5.2017
ADDRESSED TO R2
WP(C)s 10495 & 25548/2021
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF EMAILS DATED 25.1.2021
ADDRESSED TO R2
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF EMAILS DATED 10.2.2021
ADDRESSED TO R2
EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 8.3.2021
ADDRESSED TO R2.
EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED
27.2.2021
Exhibit P14 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BANK GUARANTEE
DATED 15.06.2022 AND TYPED COPY.
Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE RENEWAL APPLICATION
DATED 24.02.2021.
Exhibit P16 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED
27/7/2022 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
ADDRESSED TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT AND
TYPED COPY.
Exhibit P17 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 03.08.2022
AND TYPED COPY.
