Gujarat High Court
Kindle vs Union on 20 October, 2011
Author: Abhilasha Kumari
Bench: Abhilasha Kumari
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/16058/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16058 of 2011
=========================================================
KINDLE
ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED - Petitioner(s)
Versus
UNION
OF INDIA THRO SECRETARY & 3 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
DUSHYANT DAVE, LEARNED SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR SANDEEP SINGHI AND MR
VENKATESH FOR SINGHI & CO
for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR PS CHAMPANERI for Respondent(s) : 1,
MS
ASMITA PATEL LEARNED ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) :
2,
None for Respondent(s) : 3 -
4.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 20/10/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. Heard Mr.Dushyant Dave, learned Senior Advocate with Mr.Sandeep Singhi, learned advocate and Mr. Venkatesh for Singhi and Company for the petitioner.
2. It is submitted by him that the Solar Power Policy-2009 of the State Government, insofar as it, specifies that approval is to be taken from the State Government for setting up the Solar Power Generation Project is against the provisions of Section 7 of the Electricity Act, 2003, whereby, it has been enacted that "any generating company may establish, operate and maintain a generating station without obtaining a licence under this Act if it complies with the technical standards relating to connectivity with the grid referred to in clause(b) of section 73."
3. It is further submitted that no separate law has been enacted by the State Government and the Electricity Act, 2003 is a piece of Legislation enacted under Entry-38 of the Current List, which would prevail over any policy framed by the State Government especially, in view of Article 254 of the Constitution of India.
4. The learned Senior Advocate has further submitted that the petitioner-Company has entered into a Power Purchase Agreement with respondent No.4 on 20.01.2011. However, it cannot start its Power Generating Plant, as no approval for the same is being granted by the State Government, in spite of several representations addressed to the State Government by the petitioner, though, legally such approval is not required in view of the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003.
5. Notice, returnable on 23.11.2011.
6. By way of ad-interim relief, the petitioner as well as respondents shall maintain status-quo, till the next date of hearing.
(Smt. Abhilasha Kumari, J.) rakesh/ Top