1. Heard Mr. Joshi, learned Senior Counsel with Ms. Swarnalakshmi learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Vakil, learned Counsel with Mr. Hasurkar, learned advocate for the respondent electricity company.
2. Under order dated 13.5.2011 the petition has been admitted.
3. While passing the order dated 13.5.2011 the Court (Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.H. Waghela) observed and directed that:-
".....As for the ad interim relief, it was submitted by learned senior counsel, Mr. Mihir Joshi, appearing for the petitioner, that the petitioner was regularly paying the electricity bills and while bill dated 03.05.2011 for the month of April, 2011 shows Rs. 2,43,51,209.10 to be the net payable amount, the respondent have also informed the petitioner by letter dated 09.05.2011 (Annexure L) that the refundable amount shall be credited in their account in the bill of May, 2011.
However, the petitioner is advised to make payment of the bill of April 2011 within the time limit expiring today, to avoid delay payment charges. The petitioner has now received revised bill for April 2011 showing credit towards advance payment/adjustment of Rs. 1,53,05,123.60, which makes the net payable amount Rs. 80,42,666.45. As against that, the petitioner is stated to be, required to be given credit for the sum of Rs. 2,22,39,816/- being the price bill for units HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Mon Jan 08 23:07:24 IST 2018 SCA/6455/2011 2 ORDER purchased from IEX. Under the circumstances, it was prayed that the revised last date for payment i.e. 23.05.2011 mentioned in the revised bill dated 22.05.2011 was required to be extended till the petition could be heard in presence of the respondent. Learned senior counsel further submitted that the petitioner was prepared to file appropriate undertaking on oath on behalf of the petitioner to undertake that the amount which may be payable by the petitioner after reconciliation or such amount as may be directed by the Court to be paid after hearing the parties, shall be immediately paid to the respondent. The petitioner was apprehending immediate disconnection if the revised last date for payment were crossed, according to submission. Therefore, ad interim relief is granted by directing the respondent not to disconnect the electrical connection of the petitioner till the next date of hearing on condition of a duly authorized officer of the petitioner filing an undertaking on oath before this Court on or before 20.05.2011, undertaking to pay such amount as may be required to be paid to the respondent by order of this Court on the next date of hearing or any other date to which hearing may be adjourned. It would, however, be open for the respondent to approach this Court in the meantime for modification of the ad interim relief in case of necessity and the respondent is permitted to mention before Hon'ble the Vacation Judge for that purpose. Direct service is permitted."
4. It appears that in pursuance of the said order dated 13.5.2011 the petitioner, through Mr. Shata Nand Sharma, Director and CEO of the petitioner company, filed the undertaking in compliance of the said order.
4.1 Along with the undertaking said Mr. Shata Nand Sharma also placed on record copy of the resolution passed by Director of Company by Circular authorizing said Mr. Shata Nand Sharma to file the undertaking on behalf of the petitioner company.
4.2 Though the said undertaking is on record of present petition, unfortunately it is in torn condition. Therefore, so as to maintain the record in proper order and in consonance with the direction contained in order dated 13.5.2011, the petitioner and said Mr. Shata Nand Sharma are requested to file fresh undertaking in same terms and same effect. Such HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Mon Jan 08 23:07:24 IST 2018 SCA/6455/2011 3 ORDER undertaking may be submitted to the Registrar within two weeks.
5. As mentioned above petition has been admitted. So far as the issue about interim relief is concerned, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has referred to and relied on the details mentioned in the affidavit dated 23.8.2012, particularly paragraph No.3 of the said affidavit, which reads thus:-
"3. I state that in respect of the point (i) above, the Respondent has begun to raise a bill giving credit for the units purchased under Open Access from the Power Exchange India Limited and / or Indian Energy Exchange. I further state that with reference to the point (ii) above, the Respondent has begun to give credit for the units purchased from the Power Exchange India Limited and / or Indian Energy Exchange, while calculating the contract demand. I state that if and so long as a Respondent continues to give credit for the units purchased from the Power Exchange India Limited and / or Indian Energy Exchange as referred in point (i) above and for the units purchased from the Power Exchange India Limited and /or Indian Energy Exchange, while calculating the contract demand as referred in point (ii) above, then to that extent grievances of the petitioner may be said to not survive. I state and submit that the Respondent should accordingly confirm their commitment of giving credit for the units purchased from the Power Exchange India Limited and / or Indian Energy Exchange with reference to the point (i) above and for the units purchased from the Power Exchange India Limited and / or Indian Energy Exchange, while calculating the contract demand as referred in point (ii) above on ongoing basis."
6. The interim relief which is prayed for by the petitioner read thus:-
"(A).........
(B)........
(C)........
(D) Pending the hearing and final disposal off the petition, stay the bill dated 3.5.2011 to the aggregate of Rs.2,22,39,816/- referable to (i) the excess demand charges beyond 400 KVA of Rs.19,65,119/-, (ii) the charges in respect to energy units purchased by the petitioner on the exchange of Rs.1,75,45,665/-, and (iii) the electricity duty charges in respect to energy units not supplied by the Respondent of Rs.27,29,032/-.
(E) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the petition require the Respondent to refund an amount of Rs.2,10,05,472/- in respect to bill dated 4.4.2011, referable to (i) the excess demand charges beyond 4000 KVA of Rs.22,88,895/- (ii) the charges in respect to energy units purchased by the Petitioner on the exchange of Rs.1,61,15,387/-, and (iii) the electricity duty charges in respect to energy units not supplied by the Respondent of Rs.26,01,190/-.
(F) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the petition require the Respondent to refund to grant credit for the units purchased on Exchange but not consumed by the Petitioner."
7. Having regard to the details mentioned in the said HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Mon Jan 08 23:07:24 IST 2018 SCA/6455/2011 4 ORDER paragraph No.3 of affidavit dated 24.8.2012 vis a vis the interim relief prayed for by the petitioner in paragraph No.22 (D), (E) and (F) and the above referred order dated 13.5.2011 it appears that at this stage any need for granting interim relief does not not arise or survive. Hence interim relief as prayed for is not granted.
In view of the fact that while admitting the petition under order dated 13.5.2011, the Court directed office to make process of admission of petition returnable on 15.7.2011, office is directed to list the petition in the cause list for final hearing on 5.11.2012.
(K.M.THAKER,J.) Suresh* HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Mon Jan 08 23:07:24 IST 2018