Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Aapeshwar Granite vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:40164) on 22 November, 2023

Author: Rekha Borana

Bench: Rekha Borana

[2023:RJ-JD:40164]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9688/2023

1. Aapeshwar Granite, Proprietorship/partner Pushpendra
Singh S/o Sohan Singh, Age About 34 Yrs, R/o, Manpura
Colony Jalore Rajasthan.
2. Navdeep Stone, Proprietorship/partner Deepak Kumar S/o
Jhuta Ram, Age About 29 Yrs, R/o, Near Godiji Mandir
Jalore Rajasthan.
3. Ashok Industries, Proprietorship/partner Ashok Kumar S/
o Sohan Lal, Age About 34 Yrs, R/o, Rampura Colony
Jalore Rajasthan.
4. Mahalaxmi Stone, Proprietorship/partner Dilip Singh S/o
Mohan Singh, Age About 39 Yrs, R/o, Near Nagar Parishad
Jalore Rajasthan.
5. Aapnath Granite, Proprietorship/partner Dilip Singh S/o
Sohan Singh, Age About 39 Yrs, R/o, R/o, Manpura
Colony Jalore Rajasthan
6. Santosh Granites, Proprietorship/partner Lala Ram S/o
Kapoora Ram, Age About 48 Yrs, R/o, Adoni Kurnool
Andhara Pardesh.
7. Sheetal Industries, Proprietorship/partner Vinay
Choudhary S/o Bhiyaram, Age About 60 Yrs, R/o, Madri
Jalore Rajasthan.
8. Radheshyam Granite, Proprietorship/partner Rakesh
Kumar S/o Bhanwar Lal, Age About 42 Yrs, R/o, Sai Vihar
Colony Jalore Rajasthan.
9. Bherunath Granite, Proprietorship/partner Mahendra
Singh S/o Papji Gurjar, Age About 36 Yrs, R/o, Rajendra
Nagar Jalore Rajasthan
10. Krishna Stone Mart, Proprietorship/partner Sunil Kumar
S/o Dharma Ram, Age About 41 Yrs, R/o, Besroli Nagaur
Rajasthan
11. Maruti Granite And Marble, Proprietorship/partner
Purshotam S/o Hastimal, Age About 39 Yrs, R/o, Bagra
Jalore Rajasthan
12. Maruti Marble Industries, Proprietorship/partner Kanti Lal
Agarwal S/o Biju Lal Agarwal, Age About 51 Yrs, R/o,
Bagra Jalore Rajasthan

(Downloaded on 22/11/2023 at 08:42:35 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:40164] (2 of 5) [CW-9688/2023]

13. Jay Laxmi Granite, Proprietorship/partner Sukan Kumar
S/o Biju Lal Agarwal, Age About 48 Yrs, R/o, Bagra Dist.
Jalore Rajasthan
14. Maruti Granimarmo, Proprietorship/partner Surekha
Agarwal W/o Sukan Kumar, Age About 44 Yrs, R/o, Bagra
Jalore Rajasthan
15. Bhawani Granite, Proprietorship/partner Shanti Lal S/o
Bhimaram, Age About 46 Yrs, R/o, Badanwari Ahore
Jalore Rajasthan
16. Shree Ridhi Sidhi Granites, Proprietorship/partner Renu
Devi W/o Mahaveer Prasad, Age About 52 Yrs, R/o,
Ashapurna Colony Jalore Rajasthan
17. Rajdhani Granite, Proprietorship/partner Raju S/o
Gajaram, Age About 33 Yrs, R/o, Maheshpura Road Jalore
Rajasthan
18. Usha Granimarmo, Proprietorship/partner Moolchand S/o
Trilokchand, Age About 40 Yrs, R/o, Shivshinghpura Sikar
Rajasthan
19. K.p. Stones, Proprietorship/partner Morki Devi S/o Chunni
Lal , Age About 50 Yrs, R/o, Pathan Badi Begam Bazar
Nampali Hyderabad Andhra Pardesh
20. Shree Shanti Granite, Proprietorship/partner Manish
Kumar S/o Om Prakash, Age About 34 Yrs, R/o, Sanjay
Colony Ghandhipura Balotra Rajasthan
21. Chesta Granite, Proprietorship/partner Pappu Kumar
Yadav S/o Parbhati Lal, Age About 36 Yrs, R/o, Udepura
Sikar Rajasthan
22. Navratan Industries, Proprietorship/partner Ramkaran S/o
Mohan Lal, Age About 42 Yrs, R/o, Kundalpur Sikar
Rajasthan
23. Rameshwar Export Industries, Proprietorship/partner Jay
Chand Naga S/o Rameshwar Lal, Age About 23 Yrs, R/o,
Khatinada Sikar Rajasthan
24. Sonana Granite, Proprietorship/partner Iswar Lal S/o
Kasna Ram, Age About 45 Yrs, R/o, Chrbhujha Eng. Ahore
Jalore Rajasthan
25. Raksha Stone, Proprietorship/partner Jesaram S/o
Hansaram , Age About 50 Yrs, R/o, Galdhani Jawaibandh
Sumerpur Rajasthan

(Downloaded on 22/11/2023 at 08:42:35 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:40164] (3 of 5) [CW-9688/2023]

----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Energy, Government Of Rajasthan, It
Center, Chambal Power House Campus, Hawa Sarak,
Jaipur-302006.
2. Rajasthan Electricity Regulation Commission, Through Its
Chairman Vidhyut Viniyamak Bhawan, Sahakar Marg,
Near State Motor Garage, Jaipur Rajasthan 302001.
3. Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Through Its
Managing Director, New Power House, Industrial Area,
Jodhpur (Raj.) 342005.
4. The Additional Engineer (O And M), Jodhpur Vidhyut
Vitaran Nigam Ltd, Jalore.
5. The Assistant Engineer (O And M), Jodhpur Vidhyut
Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Jalore.
6. The Additional Chief Engineer (Hq), Jodhpur Vidhyut
Vitaran Nigam Ltd., New Power House, Industrial Area,
Jodhpur (Raj.) 342005.
----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG
Mr. Manish Tak

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Judgment

22/11/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners 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:40164] (4 of 5) [CW-9688/2023]

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:40164] (5 of 5) [CW-9688/2023]

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 157-KashishS/-