Karnataka High Court
M/S. Nagakrupa Stone Crusher vs Mangalore Electricity Company Ltd on 28 June, 2013
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda
Bench: A.N. Venugopala Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF JUNE, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO.23977/2013 (GM-KEB)
BETWEEN:
M/s. Nagakrupa Stone Crusher
Sy. No.601/5P, Kadimaru Nitte Village,
Karkala Taluk - 576 102,
Udupi District.
Represented by its Proprietor
Sri Aravind P. Bhandary,
S/o. Purushotham Bhandary,
Aged about 42 years.
...PETITIONER
(By Sri S. Vishwajith Shetty, Adv.)
AND:
1. Mangalore Electricity Company Ltd.,
Udupi Division,
Maruthi Veethika Road,
Udupi - 576 101.
2. The Assistant Executive Engineer,
MESCOM Electricity Supply Company,
Udupi Division,
Udupi District - 576 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(By Sri N.K. Gupta, Adv.)
This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of
the Constitution of India, praying to quash Annexure-F
2
dated 20.04.13 issued by the 2nd respondent and direct the
respondents to forthwith give electricity connection to the
meter bearing R.R.No.HT.47 installed in the petitioner's
property bearing Sy.No.601/5P of Kadimaru Nitte Village,
Karkala Taluk, Udupi District.
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court
made the following:
ORDER
Petitioner possessed licence for the purpose of running stone crushing business at 601/5P of Kadimaru Nitte Village, Karkala Taluk, Udupi District. Petitioner was granted electricity connection by the respondents with a meter bearing R.R.No.HT.47, installed in the stone crushing unit. Pursuant to the orders passed by the Apex Court, the State Government issued directions for shifting of existing stone crushing unit/s to safer zone/s. The State Government having enacted Karnataka Regulation of Stone Crushers Act, 2011, the concerned authority has notified the safer zone/s. Petitioner has filed an application for shifting said stone crushing unit to a safer zone and the same is under consideration. Respondents having disconnected the electricity supply to the petitioner's stone 3 crushing unit, this writ petition has been filed to quash the notice issued to it and for directing the respondent No.2, to forthwith give electricity connection to the meter bearing R.R.No.HT.47 installed in the petitioner's property bearing 601/5P of Kadimaru Nitte Village, Karkala Taluk, Udupi Distirct.
2. Sri Vishwajith Shetty, learned advocate, contended that the petitioner having not committed any default in the matter of payment of electricity charges, the respondents without serving the notice by specifying the reason, arbitrarily and illegally disconnected the electricity supply. He submitted that the petitioner has made huge investment for the purpose of running stone crushing unit and in view of the disconnection of electricity, the petitioner is put to loss and that personnel engaged in the crushing unit have also been rendered jobless and hence interference in the matter as warranted.
3. Sri. N.K. Gupta, learned advocate for the respondents, on the other hand contended that the 4 respondents disconnected electricity supply to the petitioner by issuing a notice and hence, action of the respondents is neither arbitrary nor illegal, warranting any interference and sought dismissal of writ petition.
4. Perused the writ petition record. In view of the rival contentions, the point for consideration is 'whether the disconnection of electricity supply to the petitioner's unit is arbitrary and illegal?'
5. Regulation 7 of 'Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (Electricity supply) Code, 2004 (for short, the Code), provides for disconnection of supply by a licensee. Clause-1 thereunder makes it clear that the licensee shall not disconnect the supply to a consumer, except in the circumstances specified therein. Regulation 7.2 mandates that before effecting disconnection under clauses 7.1(b) to 7.1(i), due notice in the manner provided in Regulation 9 shall be given to the consumer by the licensee. Regulation 9 stipulates that a licensee shall ensure that the notices issued under the Code to a 5 consumer are in accordance with the Code and in writing and are expressed in plain language either in Kannada or in English 'specifying the reason for the notice and likely action by the licensee'.
6. The notice issued to the petitioner, impugned in this petition, when perused, it is clear that it is not in conformity with the provisions noticed supra. The respondents have failed 'to specify in the impugned notice, the reason for the notice and likely action by them'. The impugned notice, apart from being not in conformity with the provisions noticed supra, is also bald. There is denial of reasonable opportunity to the petitioner even to submit representation. Hence, the impugned notice is unsustainable.
In the result, writ petition is allowed in part and the impugned notice is quashed. However, the concerned authority-respondent shall issue a fresh notice to the petitioner on or before 08.07.2013, keeping in view the observations and provisions noticed supra. The petitioner 6 is at liberty to file its objections, if any, on or before 12.07.2013. If a personal hearing is sought by the petitioner, the authority shall grant opportunity of personal hearing and thereafter take a decision on or before 20.07.2013, with regard to the giving electricity connection or otherwise, to the meter bearing R.R.No.HT.47, installed in the petitioner's property.
Keeping in view the time bound action by the respondents, the Registry is directed to furnish forthwith, a carbon copy of this order to Sri. N.K. Gupta.
Sd/-
JUDGE Ksj/-