Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Bma Stainless Limited & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 8 September, 2011
Author: Jayanta Kumar Biswas
Bench: Jayanta Kumar Biswas
1
8.09.2011
In The High Court At Calcutta
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
W.P.No.15074 (W) of 2011
BMA Stainless Limited & Anr.
v.
Union of India & Ors.
Mr.Sagar Bandyopadhyay
Mr.Tapas Saha
Ms.Soma Kar Ghosh.
... for the petitioners.
Mr.Prasun Mukherjee.
... for DVC.
It is submitted by counsel for the parties that the issues involved in this
case are identical with the one's involved in W.P.No.11813(W) of 2011 (Bhaskar
Shrachi Alloys Limited & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.).
In W.P.No.11813(W) of 2011 an order dated August 11, 2011 has been passed. The order
is quoted below:
"After hearing Mr. Advocate General appearing for the Commission, Mr.Sengupta
appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Mukherjee appearing for the Corporation and considering
the suggestions given by them for immediate disposal of the art.226 petition, I am of the view that
it will be appropriate to admit the petition keeping the question of its maintainability open and
ask the Corporation not to disconnect supply to the petitioners alleging failure to pay energy
charge in terms of the impugned order of the Commission provisionally determining the tariff. It
is to be noted that in some art.226 petitions moved before the Jharkhand High Court an interim
order has been made restraining the Corporation from recovering energy charge from the
petitioners concerned in terms of the order of the Commission determining provisional tariff.
For these reasons, I admit the petition keeping the question of its
maintainability open and order that until next hearing the Corporation shall not
disconnect supply to the petitioners alleging failure to pay energy charge in terms
of the order of the Commission determining provisional tariff.
The respondents shall file opposition by August 17, 2011; advance
copy of the reply, if any, shall be served by August 22, 2011. To daily list for hearing on August 23, 2011. Certified xerox."
Counsel for the parties have submitted that the same interim order that was passed in W.P.No.11813(W) of 2011 may be passed in this case as well.
It has been submitted that the respondents have decided not to file any opposition to this petition, for they have decided to contest all the cases relying on the opposition filed in W.P.No.11813(W) of 2011.
2I am of the view that the same interim order that was passed in W.P.No.11813(W) of 2011 should be passed in this case as well.
For these reasons, I admit the petition keeping the question of its maintainability open and order that until next hearing the Corporation shall not disconnect supply to the petitioners alleging failure to pay energy charge in terms of the order of the Commission determining provisional tariff.
This petition shall be heard with W.P.No.11813(W) of 2011. Certified xerox.
(Jayanta Kumar Biswas,J).