M/s. Ignite Steel Pvt. Ltd. vs Jharkhand State Electricity Board and Others

Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.—Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner is seeking adjustment of the amount deposited for erection of a separate bay for transmission of ''Dedicated Line'' to the induction furnace of its Unit, a HT/SS consumer.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that temporarily, connection was granted from a separate feeder by tapping from existing line, but because of intermittent supply, the petitioner ultimately requested the respondents by letter dated 30th November 2005 indicating its intention to surrender the 33 KV line for which an agreement was entered with it. The petitioner again made a representation on 29th July 2006 (Annexure-5) requesting the respondents to adjust due of the petitioner from the security deposit of Rs. 45,90,000/- and deposit of Rs. 11,53,174/- which was deposited for erection of 33 KV line from Chandil sub-station to its plant, but the line has not been erected till now. However, the petitioner is aggrieved as the respondents have raised a final energy bill contained at Annexure-6 dated 01st March, 2007 showing the net amount payable by the consumer totalling Rs. 12,08,586/-, which according to the petitioner, however does not take into account the additional deposit of Rs. 11,53,174/- deposited by it for erection of 33 KV line to its Unit earlier.

Respondents in spite of having been granted time earlier, have not yet filed counter-affidavit in the matter which is pending since the year 2008. In the circumstances, without entering into the merits of the controversy, the petitioner is allowed to approach the respondent No. 2-The General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Electric Supply Area, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Bistupur, Jamshedpur with a representation seeking redressal of its grievances as made out in the present writ application for the refund of the balance amount claimed as due to it after adjustment of the outstanding dues against the petitioner. Let the representation be made within a period of three weeks from today together with all facts and supporting documents before the respondent No. 2, who in turn, shall consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with law as well as Circular/Tariff Notification of the Board prevalent at the relevant point of time and pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of twelve weeks thereafter, which shall also be communicated to the petitioner. Any consequential balance remaining thereafter will be paid by the petitioner or otherwise, the petitioner will be liable to refund of the excess amount depending upon the order passed by the respondent No. 2.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.