Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidhyut ... vs M/S Aquatic Pipes And Tubes Pvt. Ltd. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 21916 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidhyut ... vs M/S Aquatic Pipes And Tubes Pvt. Ltd. ... on 20 December, 2023

Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari

Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, Pranay Verma

                             1
                                           W.A. No. 1969 of 2023


      IN    THE   HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
                      PRADESH
                     AT I N D O R E
                          BEFORE
           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND
                     DHARMADHIKARI
                             &
           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
              ON THE 20th OF DECEMBER, 2023


                WRIT APPEAL No. 1969 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
   MADHYA PRADESH MADHYA KSHETRA VIDHYUT VITRAN COMPANY
   CENTRAL DISCOM THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR BIJLI NAGAR
1.
   COLONY, NISHTHA PARISAR GOVINDPURA, BHOPAL (MADHYA
   PRADESH)
   CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (CENTRALIZED HT EBILLING CELL)
   MADHYA PRADESH MADHYA KSHETRA VIDYUT VITARAN CO. LTD.
2.
   (CENTRAL DISCOM BIJLI NAGAR COLONY, NISHTHA PARISAR,
   GOVINDPURA, BHOPAL (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
   GENERAL MANAGER (CENTRALIZED HT EBILLING CELL) MADHYA
   PRADESH MADHYA KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAN CO. LTD. (CENTRAL
3.
   DISCOM) BIJLI NAGAR COLONY, NISHTHA PARISAR, GOVINDPURA,
   BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
   GENERAL MANAGER MP MADHYA KSHETRA VIDHYUT VITRAN
4. COMPANY (CENTRAL DISCOM) RAJGARH (BIAORA) MADHYA
   PRADESH (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                               .....APPELLANTS
(SHRI ADITYA GOYAL, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS).
AND
M/S AQUATIC PIPES AND TUBES PVT. LTD. THROUGH SHRI
GHANSHYAM GUPTA S/O LATE SHRI RAMVILAS GUPTA, AGED ABOUT
51 YEARS, OCCUPATION: DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY 501-502,
VIKRAM TOWER, 4TH FLOOR SAPNA SANGEETA ROAD (MADHYA
PRADESH)
                                               .....RESPONDENT
(NONE PRESENT FOR THE RESPONDENT)
                                                   2
                                                                           W.A. No. 1969 of 2023

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Reserved on                 :           30.11.2023
       Pronounced on               :            20.12.2023
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        This appeal having been heard and reserved for orders coming
on      for pronouncement this day,                          Hon'ble Shri Justice S.A.
DHARMADHIKARI pronounced the following
                                              ORDER

Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. This writ appeal under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uccha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 has been filed being aggrieved by the order dated 11.09.2023 passed in Writ Petition No.17919/2020 whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent has been allowed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that to encourage new high tension consumers in connect with grid of Electricity Distribution Companies and to promote industrialization in the State, the State Government issued a notification dated 04.03.2014 published in the Gazzette of M.P. that consumers who are taking HT connections of 33/132/220 KV shall be entitled for exemption from payment of electricity duty on the electricity consumption for the period of 5/7/10 years respectively. The respondent herein had applied under the "SANKALP" scheme on 02.12.2018 to get 33 KV connection. The Deputy General Manager(O & M) carried out survey of the location and submitted a report and vide letter dated 27.12.2018, informed the respondent about the estimated cost of Rs. 18,14,565/- which was duly deposited by the respondent, next day by way of RTGS. An agreement was executed on 22.02.2019 and the work order dated 23.02.2019. The respondent constructed sub-station to get HT

supply which has commenced on 31.03.2019. The first electricity bill was issued on 30.04.2019 in which the electricity duty is charged to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-. Against the said electricity duty charged, the respondent preferred representations to the competent authorities which were rejected. The respondent filed a writ petition which was allowed and appellants were directed to refund the amount of electricity duty paid by the him within a stipulated time. Hence, this intra Court appeal has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that supply of electricity has commenced on 31.03.2019 which falls outside the purview of five years period from the date of notification i.e. 04.03.2014. As per the grid system and other technical procedures involved in providing the HT connection to a consumer, the completion of HT electricity connection in the instant case is deemed to be w.e.f. 31.03.2019. Merely applying for the HT connection would not entitle the respondent to seek the benefit of notification dated 04.03.2014. Learned Single Judge has failed to consider that merely applying for the HT connection by the respondent does not mean that connection shall be served as after checking all the parameters and on submission of relevant documents required as well as deposit of money, connection is given. Learned Single Judge further failed to consider that appellants have not breached time limits as provided under the law for giving electricity connection to the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants has further drawn the attention of this Court towards the language used in the notification dated 04.03.2014 which is mentioned below:

'This exemption shall be available only to the new high tension

consumers who take new connection from Electricity

Distribution Companies of the State within 5 years from the

date of issue of the notification"

5. Referring to the condition mentioned above, it is submitted that from the language used in the notification, it is crystal clear that word used are 'take new connection' and not 'apply' for new connection. He further submitted that any notification or circular granting any exemption from a statutory duty has to be narrowly and strictly construed and only when an entity falls within the four corners of the exemption notification, then such a benefit be conferred upon them. In this regard, learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Eagle Flask Industries Vs. Central Excise Pune, reported in (2004) Supp (4) SCR 35 where in it has been held that in order to avail the benefit under an exemption notification, conditions have to be strictly complied with.

6. It is also submitted that learned Single Judge has erred in not considering the fact that electricity was supplied to the respondent on 31.03.2019 which falls outside the purview of five year period from the date of notification i.e. 04.03.2014. As per the said notification, the exemption is applicable only upto 04.03.2019 for 33 KV HT consumer.

7. He also submitted that learned Single Judge instead of relegating the respondent to avail the alternative remedy as per Section 10 of the Madhya Pradesh Vidhyut Shulk Adhiniyam which deals with settlement of disputes in case where the dispute arises between consumer and distribution licensee of electricity, the same are referred to the Electrical Inspector who is specialized authority designated under the Adhiniyam has allowed the writ petition and directed the appellants to refund the amount of electricity duty paid by the respondent which is untenable. Hence, the instant appeal

is allowed and appellants be exempted from refund of the amount of electricity duty paid by the respondent and in alternative direct that the amount shall be recoverable from the State Government.

8. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record.

9. It is not in dispute that appellants have given the connection as on 31.03.2019 after following the due procedure laid down in that regard within the time bound manner i.e. within 90 days. Hence, there is no laxity on the part of appellants in providing HT connection to the respondent. The issue involved herein pertains to application of electricity duty which is very much related to the State Government and not with the appellants /DISCOM. Since the duty has been levied as per the State Government Notification and appellant/DISCOM has to strictly abide by the directives of the State Government notification, the order dated 11.09.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 17919/2020 needs no interference.

10. The grievance of the appellants herein is that as per notification, the State Government is liable to make the payment, therefore direction be issued to the State Government accordingly is concerned, it is clarified that appellants shall make refund of the amount to the respondent herein as per the directions of the learned Single Judge. However, appellants would be at liberty to recover the said amount from the State Government.

11. With the aforesaid, the present writ appeal stands disposed off.

(PRANAY VERMA) (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE JUDGE

sh/-