M/S Azad Coach Builders Private Limited vs Chief Engineer on 22 January, 2020

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Azad Coach Builders Private Limited vs Chief Engineer on 22 January, 2020

Bench: Krishna S.Dixit

                            1

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2020

                        BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

        WRIT PETITION NO.27049 OF 2018 (GM-KEB)

BETWEEN

M/S AZAD COACH BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED,
SHESHAGIRIHALLI, BIDADI HOBLI,
RAMANAGARA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
SRI.CHARANJEET SINGH CHADHA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
S/O SRI C.S.CHADHA.                      ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI.S.D.N. PRASAD, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.    CHIEF ENGINEER,
      MESCOM & BESCOM CONSUMER
      REVENUE APPELLATE AUTHORITY,
      MANGALURU REGION, PARADINE PLAZA,
      5TH FLOOR, A.B.SHETTY CIRCLE,
      PANDESHWARA,
      MANGALURU-575 001

2.    THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (REVENUE),
      MESCOM CORPORATE OFFICE,
      K.R.CIRCLE,
      BENGALURU-560 001.

3.    THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
      BESCOM-BIDADI SUB DIVISION,
      BIDADI-562 159,
      RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT.    ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.H.V. DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI.G.C. SHANKUKHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)
                                   2

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RELEVANT       RECORDS,      EXAMINE           THE         SAME      AND
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIDE ANNEXURE-A BEARING
NO.RA:21/2009        DATED   05.03.2018        PASSED           BY   THE
RESPONDENT NO.1 AND ETC.


      THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
                             ORDER

Petitioner who claims that he was a tenant in respect of the subject premises, was alleged to have consumed 177 H.P load of unauthorized electricity during the relevant period and on that basis, a demand was raised for a sum of Rs.2,68,600/-; his appeal against the same having been negatived by the 1st respondent vide order dated 5.3.2018, a copy whereof is at Annexure - A, this Writ Petition has been presented, aggrieved thereby.

2. After service of notice, the respondents having entered appearance through their Panel Counsel, resist the Writ Petition making submission in justification of the impugned order.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers, this court is of a considered opinion that, reprieve needs to be granted to the petitioner as under, because:

(a) petitioner did not have reasonable opportunity in the said appeal of his own and that the impugned order is passed against the appellant virtually ex parte; and

(b) in any civilized jurisdiction, a party to the statutory proceeding should have a reasonable opportunity of putting forth his version for consideration and that denying such an opportunity is violative of principles of natural justice.

In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition succeeds in part; a writ of certiorari issues quashing the impugned order; the matter is remitted back to the 1st respondent for consideration afresh on merits within a period of three months and after giving opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.

It is needless to mention that the result of the appeal shall be made known to the petitioner, forthwith and if any adverse order is made against him, the same shall not be 4 given effect to for a period of three weeks, after such intimation in writing is sent to him.

All contentions of the parties are kept open. No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE cbc

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court