Chief Justice's Court
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19781 of 2018 Petitioner :- M/S New Nikhar Fabrics Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bidhan Chandra Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Awadhesh Kumar Saxena
Hon'ble Dilip B. Bhosale,Chief Justice Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard Mr Bidhan Chandra Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr A K Saxena, learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3.
Counsel appearing for the petitioner, at the outset, invites our attention to the order dated 20.9.2017 passed by this Court in Writ-C No.44283 of 2017 and submits that this writ petition can also be disposed of in terms of the said order. The relevant portion of the order dated 20.9.2017, reads thus:
"Petitioners are proprietorship concerns. They are engaged in manufacture of cotton thread by the process of power loom. They have approached this Court challenging the action of the second respondent in withdrawing the subsidy granted to them pursuant to the G.O. Dated 14.06.2006.
Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners were covered under Rate Schedule LMV-6, which makes a provision for supply of electricity to power looms on flat rate in accordance with the Government Order dated 14.06.2006 and the order passed by U.P. Electricity Regulation Commission dated 11.07.2006.
All of a sudden, this benefit of subsidy extended to the petitioners has been cancelled on the ground that his connection is not for the weaver user, but it is for investors or businessmen. It is undisputed that the petitioners were availing subsidy for last several years.
The issue is one, which requires investigation into the questions of fact and, thus, no useful purpose would be served by keeping this petition pending and calling for a counter affidavit and interest of justice would stand served, in case, a fact finding authority looks into the grievance of the petitioners initially.
Learned Standing Counsel fairly states that, in case, the petitioners raise their grievance before appropriate authority by making a representation, the said authority shall proceed to consider and decide the same expeditiously.
Considering the facts, we dispose of the writ petition by giving liberty to the petitioners to submit a representation raising their grievances annexing therewith all supporting documents as well as a copy of the writ petition and its annexures before respondent no. 3, with the further direction to the said authority to consider and decide the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law and the policy of the State Government expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of making of the representation.
It is directed that till the disposal of the representation, as directed aforesaid, supply of electrical energy to the petitioner shall be continued, subject to payment of flat rate as was being paid by the petitioners before the date of withdrawal.
We make it clear that we have not entered into the merits of the claim being made by the petitioners and the same shall be decided by the authority concerned on its own merits."
Counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3, has no objection in disposing of this writ petition in terms of the said order. Hence, the petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 20.9.2017.
Order Date :- 30.5.2018 RKK/-
(Dilip B Bhosale, CJ) (Suneet Kumar, J)