Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Debeanjana Hard Coke Private Limited & ... vs West Bengal Electricity Regulatory ... on 12 February, 2021
Author: Arindam Mukherjee
Bench: Arindam Mukherjee
7 12.02.2021
Ct. No.23 sb.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE (Via Video Conference) WPA 4168 of 2021 Debeanjana Hard Coke Private Limited & Anr.
Vs. West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.
Mr. Surojit Nath Mitra, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Gautam Shroff, Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty, Mr. Siddharth Shroff ... For the petitioners.
Mr. Pratik Dhar, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Neha Chakraborty ... For WBERC.
Mr. Jaydip Kar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Prasun Mukherjee Mr. Deepak Agarwal ... For DVC Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
The petitioner no.1 is a consumer under Damodar Valley Corporation (in short "DVC") for its factory situated at Hetedoba, Faridpur, Paschim Bardhaman. The petitioners in this writ petition have challenged the summary statement raised by DVC, the licensee, dated 1st January, 2021 along with the amended bills claiming a sum of Rs.7,67,05,664/- and the disconnection notice dated 28th January, 2021 issued by DVC in terms thereof threatening to disconnect the supply of petitioner no.1 within 15 days from the date of issuance of the said notice. 2 The 15 days time period from 28th January, 2021 takes us to 12th February, 2021. The petitioners say that nothing is payable according to the demand made and therefor has not paid the amount claimed or any part thereof. The petitioners apprehend disconnection. The disconnection, if effected, will stop the operation of the factory and will cause immense loss to the work-in-progress. The employees of the petitioner no.1 including the petitioner no.2 will be deprived of their livelihood if the disconnection takes place.
The petitioners by referring to the Summary of Actual Payable Amount/Bill dated 1st January, 2021 say that admittedly a sum of Rs.43,52,647/- and Rs.95,80,675/- were excess payment made by the petitioner no.1 respectively during 2006-2009 and 2009- 2013. In such circumstances, the question of Delayed Payment Surcharge (in short, DPS) being attracted for the period 2010-2013 does not arise. Referring to the unpaid sum of Rs.7,60,73,163/- for the period till April 2010 as adjusted by DVC, the petitioners say that a sum of Rs.5,70,04,873/- paid by the petitioner no.1 during 9th June, 2009 and 4th October, 2010 has not been accounted for. If these figures are taken into account, the petitioners say that there will be a positive balance in favour of the petitioner no.1.
DVC, however, says that Rs.5,70,04,873/- has been taken into account while arriving at the sum of 3 Rs.7,60,73,163/-. DVC says that this can be demonstrated if few days time is given to DVC.
In the meantime, there shall be no disconnection of electricity of the petitioner no.1 till 1st March, 2021 on account of bill dated 1st January, 2021 as disconnection will lead to multiplicity of proceedings and may render the writ petition substantially infructuous.
The matter is, therefor, adjourned till 23rd February, 2021 for further clarification in the matter.
(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)