Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
M/S Munna Process House vs Rajashtan Electricity Regulation ... on 21 November, 2023
Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2023:RJ-JD:39904]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9602/2023
M/s Munna Process House, E-205 (A), Industrial Area, Ii Phase,
Balotra, Dist. Barmer - 344022 (Raj.), India Through Its
Proprietor Kamlesh Kumar Chopra S/o Sh. Dalichand Ji Chopra
Aged About 59 Years, R/o Lohno Ka Chowk, Balotra, District
Barmer Rajasthan, - 344022.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Rajashtan Electricity Regulation Commission, Through Its
Chairman Vidhyut Viniyamak Bhawan, Sahakar Marg,
Near State Motor Garage, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302001.
2. The Jodhpur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Through Its
Chairman And Managing Director, New Power House,
Industrial Area, Jodhpur, Raj - 342005.
3. Assistant Engineer (O And M), Jdvvnl, Branch Office -
Balotra, Opposite Nahata Hospital, Balotra Distrcit
Barmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ayush Goyal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG
Ms. Kumkum Shah through VC for
Mr. Vinay Kothari
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Judgment
21/11/2023
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
controversy rests decided by judgment of the co-ordinate Bench of
this Court in a bunch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.11242/2023 (Bhansali Dyeing, Proprietorship/
partner Ravi Mehta vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on
09.11.2023.
[2023:RJ-JD:39904] (2 of 3) [CW-9602/2023]
2. Learned counsel for the respondents does not refute the
above submission.
The Court while partly allowing the aforesaid writ petitions,
held as under:-
11. Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussion and the
observations made hereinabove, the present petitions
are partly allowed.
11.1. Accordingly, the impugned order dated
01.09.2022,alongwith the entire proceedings and
orders pursuant thereto, only to the extent of levy of
interest/carrying costs on the original principal
amount of Rs.3,048.64 Crores, so also the
interest/carrying costs amount payable towards other
heads and categories, are quashed and set aside.
Needless to say that the amount to be charged
towards special fuel surcharge can be recovered from
the consumers only to the extent of original principal
amount to the tune of Rs.3,048.64/- Crores.
11.2. This Court observes that the aforesaid order
has already covered almost all the issues in the
present litigation, however, in some of the instant
writ petitions, the order dated 13.06.2019has been
challenged and the said order is also hereby quashed
and set aside, only to the extent of the
interest/carrying costs amount payable on the
original principal amount as on the date of passing of
the said order; thus, recovery of special fuel
surcharge to be made only to the extent of the
original principal amount in pursuance of the said
impugned order on the same analogy as discussed
above for quashing the order dated01.09.2022.
During the process of making such recovery, amount,
if any, already recovered towards special fuel
surcharge from the consumers by the respondents,
the same shall be duly adjusted. Except for recovery
of the original principal amount, the entire
proceedings and orders in pursuance of the said
impugned order are also quashed and set aside.
11.3. Thus, the respondent-DISCOMS shall be
accordingly free to proceed to recover the respective
original principal amounts from the consumers under
the head of special fuel surcharge, strictly in
accordance with this judgment.
3. In view of the submission made and in view of the fact that
the present matter being covered by the judgment of
[2023:RJ-JD:39904] (3 of 3) [CW-9602/2023]
Bhansali Dyeing (supra) is not refuted by learned counsel for the
respondents, the present writ petition is also partly allowed in
terms of the same directions as issued in the case of Bhansali
Dyeing (supra).
4. Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, also stand
dismissed.
(REKHA BORANA),J
50-KashishS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
