Patna High Court - Orders
M/S Dadiji Steels Pvt. Ltd. vs The State Of Bihar on 27 May, 2020
Author: Chakradhari Sharan Singh
Bench: Chakradhari Sharan Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5682 of 2020
======================================================
M/s Dadiji Steels Pvt. Ltd. a Company incorporated under the provisions of
the Companies Act, 1956 having its Registered Office at 308, Narayan Plaza,
Exhibition Road, P.S. Gandhi Maidan, District- Patna through one of its
Directors, Ramesh Chandra Gupta, Male, (Aged about 61 Years), S/o late
Shriram Gupta, Resident of 502,Santosha Complex, Bandar Bagicha, Fraser
Road, P.S. Kotwali, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Energy, Main
Secretariat, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Industries, Government of Bihar,
Vikash Bhavan, Bailey Road, Patna.
3. The Chairman cum Managing Director, Bihar State Power Holding
Company Limited, Vidyut Bhavan, Bailey Road, Patna.
4. The Managing Director, South Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd. 2nd
Floor, Vidyut Bhavan, Bailey Road, Patna.
5. The Chief Engineer - Commercial, South Bihar Power Distribution
Company Ltd., 2nd Floor, Vidyut Bhavan, Bailey Road, Patna.
6. The General Manager Finance and Accounts, South Bihar Power
Distribution Company Ltd., 2nd Floor, Vidyut Bhavan, Bailey Road, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gautam Kejriwal
with Mr.Parul Prasad and
Ms. Sushila Agarwal, Advocates
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Subash Prasad Singh, GA-4
with Mr. Ravi Kumar, JC to GP-4
For Respondetnts 3 to 6: Mr. Vinay Kiriti Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN
SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 27-05-2020I have heard Mr. Gautam Kejriwal, assisted by Mr. Parul Prasad and Ms. Suishila Agarwal, learned counsels for the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. Vinay Kiriti Singh, learned counsel, representing respondent Nos. 3 to 6 and Mr. Ravi Kumar, learned JC to GP-4.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5682 of 2020(4) dt.27-05-2020 2/8
2. This writ application has been filed seeking following reliefs:-
"i) For issuance of appropriate Writ(s) for quashing the Electricity Bill No. 10078903140 dt. 04.05.2020 as being wholly arbitrary and illegal and for direction to issue fresh bill for no charges as during the month of April, 2020 the electricity was not consumed as the factory did not run;
ii) For issuance of appropriate writ/direction to review the Bill No. 100669917 dt.
03.04.2020 for the month of March, 2020 by granting proportionate reduction in the demand charges for the period of actual consumption of energy by the petitioner;
iii) For a direction upon the Respondents restraining from taking any coercive measures for non payment of the bill for the month of April, 2020;
iv) For a direction upon the Respondents to grant adjustment after revising the bill for the month of March, 2020 to the extent of excess amount realized from the petitioner Patna High Court CWJC No.5682 of 2020(4) dt.27-05-2020 3/8 by the respondents even though the unit was closed due to lock down;"
3. It is the petitioner's case that the petitioner is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, engaged in manufacturing of MS Ingot and Ms. Billets in its Furnace and TMT Bar in the Rolling Mill and for the said purpose, it has obtained electricity connection under HTSS Category for a Contract Demand of 14701 KVA. According to the petitioner, the last agreement for supply of electricity with the respondents South Bihar Power Holding Company was entered into on 29.12.2012 for the said Contract Demand of 14701 KVA.
4. The manufacturing Unit was running smoothly till, amid outbreak of pandemic COVID-19, the Health Department, Government of Bihar came out with an order dated 22.03.2020 in exercise of the powers under Section 2 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, whereby all Industrial Units except those exempted were prevented from operating. The National Disaster Management Authority, exercising powers under Section 6(2) (i) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 also issued an order dated 24.03.2020 to take measures for ensuring social distancing so as to prevent spread of COVID-19 Patna High Court CWJC No.5682 of 2020(4) dt.27-05-2020 4/8 in the country.
5. The Government of India also came out with an order consequent upon the decision of the National Disaster Management Authority, the effect of which was a nationwide lock down except operation of exempted activities. It is the petitioner's case that the Company has been regularly depositing the electricity charges but because of the lock down under the orders passed by the State Government, it had to stop the operation of its Industrial Unit with effect from 23.03.2020. It is specific case of the petitioner that the Industrial Unit remained non operational till 03.05.2020. It is the petitioner's case that the Unit did not function for the whole of the month of April, 2020 and for the period 23.03.2020 to 31.03.2020, due to the statutory orders of the lock down, which were beyond the control of the petitioner.
6. In the aforesaid background, the petitioner has sought for quashing of the bill for March, 2020 and April, 2020 on the ground that bills should not have incorporated maximum demand charge fixed in terms of the agreement between the Bihar State Power Holding Company and the petitioner- Company. It is the petitioner's case that it was because of unforeseen unprecedented situation that the manufacturing Unit Patna High Court CWJC No.5682 of 2020(4) dt.27-05-2020 5/8 could not function, that, too, because of the statutory orders issued by the Central Government and the State Government, and, therefore, demand of maximum demand charge is unjustified.
7. Mr. Vinay Kiriti Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the South Bihar Holding Distribution Company has sought for an adjournment to file a counter affidavit and has submitted that in case it is found that the petitioner's manufacturing Unit was working even during the period of lock down, the petitioner cannot be granted any relief.
8. Mr. Ravi Verma learned counsel, representing the State of Bihar has submitted that the State Government in consultation with the Central Government is likely to take a policy decision to be applied uniformally in respect of all such establishments on the question of payment of maximum demand charge.
9. Section 3 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003 reads as under:-
"3. National Electricity Policy and plan.-(1) The Central Government shall, from time to time, prepare the National Electricity Policy and tariff policy, in consultation with the State Governments and the Authority for development of the power system based on Patna High Court CWJC No.5682 of 2020(4) dt.27-05-2020 6/8 optimal utilisation of resources such as coal, natural gas, nuclear substances or materials, bydro and renewable sources of energy.
(2) The Central Government shall publish the National Electricity Policy and tariff policy from time to time.
(3) The Central Government may, from time to time, in consultation with the State Governments and the Authority, review or revise the National Electricity Police and tariff policy referred to in sub-section(1).
(4) The Authority shall prepare a National Electricity Plan in accordance with the National Electricity Policy and notify such plan once in five year:
Provided that the Authority while preparing the National Electricity plan shall publish the draft National Electricity Plan and invite suggestions and objections thereon from licensees, generating companies and the public within such time as may be prescribed:-
Provided further that the Authority shall-
(a) notify the plan after obtaining the approval of the Central government;
(b) revise the plan incorporating therein the directions, if any, given by the Central Government while granting approval under clause(a).
Patna High Court CWJC No.5682 of 2020(4) dt.27-05-2020 7/8 (5) The Authority may review or revise the National Electricity Plan in accordance with the National Electricity Policy."
10. It is evident on reading of Section 3 that a National Electricity Policy and tariff policy is to be prepared by the Central Government in consultation with the State Government and the Central Electricity Authority for development of the power system based on optimal utilization of resources. Sub-section (3) of Section 3 empowers the Central Government to review or revise the National Electricity Policy and tariff policy referred to in sub-section (1).
11. In my view, therefore, the Union of India requires to be impleaded as party respondent in the present case. Let Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Power, New Delhi be impleaded as party respondent No. 7. Let it be done.
12. List this matter under appropriate heading on 10.06.2020.
13. Till further orders, the respondents are restrained from taking any coercive measures for realization or the bills in question in any manner including by disconnecting electric supply on the ground of non-payment of electricty bill in Patna High Court CWJC No.5682 of 2020(4) dt.27-05-2020 8/8 question.
14. Let the present order and the petition be communicated to the learned Additional Solicitor General for India by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
15. On the next date of hearing, the Registry shall ensure that a link of hearing of the present matter is sent to the learned Additional Solicitor General for India.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) arun/-
U