Delhi High Court - Orders
New Delhi Municipal Council vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr on 8 August, 2022
Author: Manoj Kumar Ohri
Bench: Manoj Kumar Ohri
$~48
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 11674/2022
NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Kadambari and Ms. Surabhi
Mittal, Advocates.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. ... Respondents
Through: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, ASC, GNCTD
with Ms. Arshya Singh, Mr. Ayush
Bansal and Mr. Sanyam Suri,
Advocates for respondent No.1.
Mr. Akhil Hasija, Advocate for
respondent No. 2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
ORDER
% 08.08.2022 CM.APPL No. 34727/2022 (Exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 11674/2022 & CM.APPL No. 34726/2022
1. By way of the present petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:
"a) Issue appropriate Writ(s) of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order, direction thereby quashing the Impugned Order dated 15.02.2021 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, New Delhi in the Appeal Nos. 9 and 11 of 2019 preferred by M/s Kolmet Enterprises under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 against the Order dated 10.07.2019 issued by Executive Engineer (Comml.), NDMC under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for unauthorised usage of electricity as invalid, non-est and null and void; and Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SANGEETA ANAND Signing Date:16.08.2022 15:26:01
b) Issue appropriate Writ(s) of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order, direction thereby staying the operation and effect of the Impugned Order dated 15.02.2021 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, New Delhi in the Appeal Nos. 9 and 11 of 2019."
2. Issue notice.
3. Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, learned Additional Standing Counsel, GNCTD accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1.
4. Mr. Akhil Hasija, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 2 and submits that the controversy in the present matter stands settled by the decision passed by this Court in Kolmet Enterprises v. New Delhi Municipal Council reported as 2022 SCC OnLine Del 2010. Relevant excerpt of the said decision reads as under:-
"23. In the present case, unauthorised use of electricity supply was allegedly made by the petitioner with respect to two areas - (i) the backyard portion of the restaurant, and (ii) the security cabin/guard room. Out of the two, the first area has reportedly been declared authorised area by this Court vide order dated 08.11.2019 passed in W.P.(C) 11832/2019.
24. The second area i.e. the security cabin, as per the petitioner, was set up in June, 2019. The contention is lent support by the fact that the Inspection Report dated 08.01.2019 does not allege unauthorised use of electricity in relation to any security cabin/guard room. The allegation of unauthorised supply of electricity to the security cabin appears to have been made by the respondent for the first time vide Notice dated 10.07.2019.
25. Though the petitioner disputed the characterization of the practice as 'unauthorised', it informed the respondent vide Reply dated 31.07.2019 that the said use had been discontinued and requested verification of the same by re-inspection. On re-inspection by the respondent, the security cabin and in fact the backyard portion of the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SANGEETA ANAND Signing Date:16.08.2022 15:26:01 restaurant as well were found to be utilizing electricity from solar panels exclusively.
26. As per the admitted case of the parties, an amount of Rs. 15,74,941/- towards alleged Misuse charges was deposited by the petitioner in the following manner:--
Sl. Date Cheque No. Amount
No.
1. 25-09-2019 990516 1,02,986.00
2. 22-10-2019 758519 86,208.00
3. 04-12-2019 367914 13,85,747.00
Total Rs. 15,74,941/-
27. Keeping in view the aforesaid as well as Regulation 59(4) of the DERC Regulations, it is directed that the amount of Rs. 15,74,941/- be refunded by the respondent to the petitioner alongwith interest @ 16% p.a. The respondent is further directed to not include the Misuse charges in the subsequent Bills issued by it as well as to revise the Bills for the period July, 2019 to February, 2022 in accordance with the order passed by the learned ADM."
5. In view of the aforesaid decision, no further orders are required to be passed in the present petition and the same is accordingly dismissed alongwith pending applications, if any.
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J AUGUST 8, 2022/v Click here to check corrigendum, if any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SANGEETA ANAND Signing Date:16.08.2022 15:26:01