Karnataka High Court
Mindtree Consulting Limited vs The Assistant Executive Engineer, ... on 1 April, 2008
Author: N.K.Patil
Bench: N.K.Patil
BETWEEN:
MINDTREE CONSULTING LIMITED' _ _ ' * ._ &
A PUBLIC' LTD COMPANY INL3Q!'IP£3!?£.i1.TEI.?e.IIJI9I.'3'ER '
THE COMPANIES ACT HAVING «ITS REGISTERED
OFFICE AT "MIND TREE«--l'_'IC»USI£" N-5.33 ' 'I .
BLGCKA NQ42, 27TH CROSS 5' _
BANASHANKARI- IIND STAGE, B'I.€JRE-7G
REP. av rs Ai$T'rICar'iiZET3'SiGl§IATQf§¥_ jrus c;o;»'
H 1': I I I I' PETITIONER
(By Sri ; sHA.~:.r1e4.A
AND % %%%% H 1 .
1 114%-: AS¥sI$fABi'I"E9IECII1'i\IE"ENGiNEER ELETRIQAL
39, SUEIDIVISION; .BANA$HA.NKARl
aancmoae EL5cTRuemr;suPPLv-co. urn.
BAI~I's3r'ai..G;'iE,f r'?'t':'I'-'*.__ 3'17.'
Iésnmearae maacroa .
ISANIBALEDRE aeciaecnw supm ¢_::o. 1.70.,
aaucaa-43:- HA ' MG -rs ceaeoams osraca
AT an. c:aca.s, BANGALORE
REF?-'BY ET _
3 I THE deiésasig MANAGERUGECHJ
iaawcsntcvns ELEC_:TRlClTY'sUPPLY co. LTD..
CORPORATE OFFICE, KJR. CIRCLE
B4'-'u"'e"»':Gf=.I.I..'.T~fit.-.
IO
M V I RE8PONDENTS-
._ {N K GUPTA. .-mt-..-,n E }
if ms in GE * ' * " 'TOF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Iw.p.u'a,1227sI§oo7
TN THE HIGH ("'0' WT G" '5 ""'1.AT'.¥ A 'T "ANG"' '"""' '".?.'wI" ' "°'.-'°'2"G?
2
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES AND :32? OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE .IVIDTICE
DT.1'I.7.2007, AT ANN-A ISSUED BY THE R1, CALLING UPON THE..BRIGADE
SOFTWARE PARK WI-IEREIN THE PETITIONER COMPANY IS "AITEN_AI%IT
AND ACTUAL consumes: or THE ELECTRICITY PRovIDEo;~}'o_;m' 3'I_-_IE:'~.
BACK Biuao AMOUNT WITH PENALTY or? Rs.1.7s;25,ea'2A ~ ---AND -
CONSEQUENTLY THE EARLIER NOTICE DT.2.8.2G06, AT"A_NN--E,=.IS$UED
BY THE R1. TO DIRECT THE RES:-"ONDE:'~IT COa'v1PAN_'!"'T3._AEPEQVE Ti-IE " =
APPLICATION FOR BIFURCATION OF THE: LOAN AND PROVIDINGEUB».
METERS TO ENABLE THE TENANTS IN THE EOFTTAJARE DF._'-"EI,,gOPIIr'IE.'xIT'
TO CLAIM BENEFITS OF POWER TARIFF; TO EIIREET THE'~RE3PONDEF1T
COMPANY TO EXTEND THE BENEFITS OF TARIFF. I:-ITQI}
TO THE PETITIONER COMPANY FROM JUNE2004 AND"CONTINUE§ THE E.
SAME TILL THE SAME IS AVAILABLE TO "THE IT gCOMI"ANIES IN "
PURSUANCE OF THE GOVERNMENT' DIRECTIONS: "TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENTS COMPANY TO ADJUST 'I"'I-IE EXCESS TARIFF COLLECTED
FROM J'u'n'-IE 2€'n."":c, IN THE SUESSEQUENT BiLLS. * I. 'g mes wan." PETITION cc:.1.:m2cé4' E,'-7 imiwaav HEARING iii =3' crzoup, runs on, THE count MADE Ti-II,':..If'0I.lj,0\__fIiIN<3:
52: " ccrrectnaas of the impugned. aamazjjdij 'r1ofic§"' dated 11*" July 2oo7 bearing :~ie.n== Siilli-$.S}'¢J.1"??"---5*' vide A--raiur' A iccuéd by I lI--I-pl' IJVIU x fire?'~i?ec§cn1denf"and_.tI1e earlier notice dated 2"" August 2005 tn;-enn:§g ~..No.AEEI2-9lAAOI2006-0713239-41 vide Anno$:ur_c'.V'"E'_ iésued by first respondcnti has prfiented inst-.§:nt writ -mtiiicn. Further, péfiiioner has sought I'fFc!r_éf.'dirocfion, directing the respondents to approve the afioplication for bifurcation of the loan and providing sub- IN T!-IE {L-'H COURT OF KARNATAKA AT " '?v"":'\' "RE "V\!'.I".i\I'(.'o.i'287fi"0l'J'7 MEE 3 meters to enable the tenants in the Sofityare ll.52
95;
1'?
:3 GD 51 at
9.
ea 5:
C!' or
--, 2:.
5?
9:.
power tarifi ai'ei5'f--«_ extend the benefits of power tariff under HT2i'a) "
petitioner - Company from June §z004»and the same till the same is eveileble t_1*i.he._!.T eenfe;.ieniee:.' in "
pursuenee 'f the Govemmentvdirections. ifurttter, petitioner has souht fora a respondents to adjust the excess tariff Ayoolfilected 2006 in the
2. Thevyénlgygrieyen-ee pefitioner in the instant writ petition .Aiev'that,:petitioner~is a tenant of the Software Park and 'they_'a'r-e consumer of eleetrieity pre\4lclyed .rou§n--.the "'r't-lletion pr"v'io'eo' under 'r-iT--'2(a) are enjoying the electricity supplied by V-Ehvvlictompany. Accordingly, petitioner - ?,_Compe.nyg_ has been paying the electricity bills as and A sane are received without any default. Be that may' / flL'3___..
I IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No,1 2878,1299? INTH GHC U TO T A G .P.No. 2 78! 00
-iii
3. Petitioner was shocked and surprised to receive the communication from one We. Brigade Bsrmalore, the owner , who rmewed the st¥'t_ort"eutt. claim in respect of installation bearing N_o;F§'R3 stating that, as per the direcfion'1«iiseAued _ again, egsoou regarding» petitioner and its ownerp are..r'i'i'atiie Vite payi"-"s sum of Rs.1,'78,25,682I- of Audit shor~ioiiioiai,é,g,aflitr HT2B tariff from June 2oozit. tto no aooefijiiinioog with the said communiceaieni the s.etement-- weseiso enciwed calling upon the said audit short claim arnountip within.'seVe:ri'days from the date of receipt of aficopy oi communication failing which the be disconnected foithwith without fur'-'ner iiiitih.1ationf_'v_v»§. __ 'Senior to the said communication, the V respondent"-4; Company had issued the impugned back thiliilri-gp demand vicie Annexure Ei oaliing upon the ' fififiaue Sonware Park, 38 / ¢"£<L_t_._, / aiore to pay the audit short IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE \V.P.No.! 2878l2t}0'7 claim of fis.1.1'5,33,493I'-- within thirty days as otherwise the installation would be disconnected and t,h.ejv"
short claim amount would be treated as _v K 'Air maid In hull --.
t mil be tevied. Beings egfirieved 'oy-them j impugned oommunioation and the "billing . referred above. petitioner felt to T7.
present the instant petition, ",t_sroprie.e reliefs,
4. -I iheive' 'heerd1:.j_tee-rned appearing for petitioner end'A'learn;ed oooosel'eppearing for respondents
- company; _ '
5._ V'Vh'onVthis jmat_ter~i'had come up for consideration a . li.,¢ eépeeinber' 23:77 for orders on l.A.lll2007 filed by after hearing both sides modified i ,3ZF"$'ZQ --J -__l.....l ndh urn Eirullrfil _ 4.
"fV"S|4bj90t" tecondition that. petitioner shall deposit a sum of lakhs and accordingly, |.A.ll was disposed of. T " Tloie respondent - Company without issuing my .n.o.ioe in / /'"
I in THE moi: count 09 KARNATAKA AT gtucmoas W.P.No.128'?8l20{i7 IN [g g _j_-,[L(} H COUBJ7 OF KARNATAKA AT BANCIALQE W=P..NoJ 281$/2907 pursuance of the audit short claim in respect of RR No.S9H'i'8, -tr-ight-way have issued the bacaicatisaiiiirng notice stating that, the electricity supply to bearing R.R.No.29HT8 would be aasmmiacteusrihe, do it not pay a sum of ie.s--e.ert They have stated that, the saidiemount audit short claim under HT2B tarifffrorn":1Jun_e.'i,l'2m4 tome, 2ooe. Further, it is stated installation was eenaiced A.-_=a=di--;ma;--_.,-e 2'C'-;'.i'1'"'uno'er i-i'i""' t*rir'f and as pa} BM. Tech., BESCOM.
Vida their1!etter--:wdeted'v.:S"'._February 2007, We. Brigade Software-ewes 'esi(ed= t:6'_.»t.pay _a sum of Rs.1.?8,25.682!-
-..-.'it!15in" seve'r"dafyfs, friiing which, instaiiation wouid be .A disconnection forthwith without any further intimation. If H jezithout issuing notice to petitioner and the owner,'t.§Mls= Brigade Seftwere, the respondent cannot '~:if»eferfiand 'he said short' cieim contrary to the relevant éindiflons of Supply code. / L / IN THE HIGH COURT OF l(.A!1.NAT_A_K._A. AT B..fi.'!~I4.'.!.-¢.L...P.E '.1.' .P.3*Jn.129.?3!29L'7 justice, it wouid sum"ce for this Court, if the io'ru_'"'cedV"'-_' communication vide Annexure A issued -jioyvt. ' competent authority and the earlier-'beck.
"tottce are direcmteted te be tree.ed ee'Vehe_.. cede-.e' "
and petitioner is directed to file it
7. Therefore, on merits of the case, the ti'ied'i~1hp:f,t1petitioner is dieoosd of I] dated 11?" July 2oo7 beeringtst »1£'t$§it.4IsAI159o--95 vide Annexure A end the "conevec',';;eittieiiiigotice dted 2"" August 2006 obeaenflg; No'.AEEi2-#9'AA"'2m" "':':'"239-41 vide V.'--..Adnexure:1'Ej«sredireoted to be treated as show cause petitioner;
it} Petitiener is directed .e fi.e chjwlen---e!re,.!y t.. TV"the_irnpugned notices vide Annexures A and E which are _diEected to be treated as show cause notices as referred 11% THE HE"!-E C..1J'P.T ..F 1<'_A...1\1.A.TA!LA. AT BANGALORE W.P.No.12878l2007 BMVEA' « IN E I-IIG OF T AT GALO E . .No. 2 781' 007 8 above, wititin two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
iii] The first respondent herein is . receive the same end pass appropriate""order, "after affording reasonable opportunity to"A:petitieiter*end:'in compliance of the Eiectricity"VA_:c:t..V_rea2d" A'%eieve':nt conditions of the Seppiy codsthst-.iA_is epptieepie t* petitiofier er-no' dispose of the 'seine, V";e)vtp'_editious|y as possible, wlthlniaiipiperltjti of'V.eight"_f.§.iee|ijs from the date of receipt of fiieee petitioner.
3," """ sbsfewetiefis, the writ petition fiied by petitiovttet is ~ « Sd/---
Tuciqe INTHE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.l2878l2007