TMI Blog2002 (12) TMI 235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... njoying the concessional tariff on the basis of interim orders of the court and, therefore, that should be taken into account and due adjustment would be made in computing the period of three years, for which we are directing for grant of concessional tariff. - Civil Appeal No. 8322-8324 of 2001, Writ Appeal No. 820 of 2001 - - - Dated:- 17-12-2002 - PATTANAIK G.B.,AND BALAKRISHNAN K.G. JJ. Mukul Rohtagi, Additional Solicitor-General of India (K.R. Sasiprabhu and M.T. George, Advocates, with him), for the respondents. H.N. Salve, L.N. Rao and Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Senior Advocates (A.T. Patra, Nipun Malhotra, Ramesh Singh, Ms. Bina Gupta, Ms. Divya Roy and Ms. Vanita Bhargava, Advocates, with them), for the appellant. -------------------------------------------------- The judgment of the Court was delivered by G.B. PATTANAIK, C.J.I.- These appeals by grant of special leave are directed against the judgment of the Kerala High Court dated April 6, 2001. The appellant approached the High Court of Kerala claiming that it would be entitled to the concessional tariff under the policy of the Government and approved by the Board even though the actual commercial ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said Kerala State Electricity Board confirmed that the appellant will be entitled to the tariff concession, as per the policy resolution of the Government. The appellant is stated to have invested a huge sum of money in setting up factory for production of ferro alloys. On April 24, 1996, the Secretary to the Government of Kerala confirmed that the appellant will be eligible for concessional tariff, if commercial production starts before December 31, 1996. In June, 1996, the appellant had informed the Board that it is going ahead with the implementation of the project of manufacturing ferro alloys and requested for issuance of demand note to enable the appellant to pay the charges. On August 23, 1996, the State Electricity Board informed the appellant about the estimated amount on the electric connection and further stated that the demand note will be intimated to the appellant at the earliest. On 3rd of August, 1996, news item was published in Delhi's Times of India, showing the Kerala Government policy in welcoming the investment in Kerala. Between August and October, 1996, the appellant intimated several authorities of the Government as well as the Board, requesting them to pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le to the units from the date of commercial production which start production between January 1, 1992 and December 31, 1996. This policy was adopted by the Kerala State Electricity Board which issued the letter dated March 27, 1992, stating therein that the concessional power tariff and electricity duty to industries would be supplied as a measure of incentive to all the units who start their commercial production between January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1996, irrespective of the day of permanent electric connection. On November 7, 1995, the Kerala State Electricity Board intimated to the appellant that in principle sanction of power had been accorded to the extent of 15 MVA at 110 KV to the appellant's factory premises at Pudussery Village and the power can be availed and will be operational with peak load restrictions only after commissioning of 220 KV sub-station at Kanjikode. But notwithstanding the same, the Board having not taken any steps to see that the power supply is given to the appellant's premises and it is for such non- supply of power, the commercial production being delayed, it will be unequitable to deny the concessional tariff flowing from the policy resolution of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... failure to provide power connection in time, but the same is not one-sided and even the appellant himself was not in a position to start commercial production within the stipulated date. Mr. Rohtagi also urged that since there has been no finding of the division Bench of the High Court, as to who was at fault and if so, to what extent on which equities could be worked out, the matter could be remanded back to the High Court for re-adjudication. Mr. Rohtagi, however to the suggestion from the court finally agreed that the appeal can be disposed of on equitable consideration by this Court by reducing the period for which concessional tariff could be given to the appellant. 5.. On perusal of the industrial policy of the Government, unequivocally indicating that concessional tariff rate would be given as well as the order of the Electricity Board adopting the same, it can be safely held that such concession could be availed of by the industrial units for a period of five years from the date, commercial production which start such production in between January 1, 1992 and December 31, 1996. In this context the stand of the Board as well as the State Government cannot be held to be dev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
