Judgment

G.N. RAY, J.:- This Civil Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 5890 of 1988, is directed against the judgment passed by the Division Bench of Karnataka High Court on April 19, 1988 in Writ Petition No. 6257 of 1981. The appellants prayed for a Writ in the nature of certiorari for directing the respondents to withdraw the letter dated July 3, 1980 (Annexure-G to the Writ Petition) and Notification dated June 30, 1980 and for appropriate writs and directions commanding the respondents to refund a sum of Rs. 60,28,175.08 collected by the respondents illegally. There was also a prayer for appropriate writs and directions on the respondents to withdraw the supplementary electricity bills for the months of November and December, 1980 and also the bills of January, 1981 and February, 1981 respectively (being Annexures CC, Y, X and GG) and for a direction to refund a sum of Rupees 18,40,800.58 collected by the respondents on account of the electricity bills. There was also a prayer for appropriate directions restraining the respondents from collecting energy charges in any manner other than on the basis of supply agreement and also restraining them from disconnecting the supply of electricity to the factory of the appellant No. 1, Indian Aluminium Company Limited at Belgaum. The appellants also prayed for directing the respondent No. 1, the Karnataka Electricity Board to exercise its powers under Section 49(3) of the Electricity (Supply) Act by either framing regulations in the tariff or by entering into an agreement providing for appropriate protective claims.

2. The essential facts concerning the writ volved in the instant Civil Appeal may be stated as follows:

The Indian Aluminium Company Limited registered under the Companies Act and one shareholder, namely, Shri K. Ghosh, were the Writ Petitioners and the respondent No. 1 is the Karnataka Electricity Board, a Body Corporate constituted under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 and respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are respectively the Executive Engineer (Electrical), O and M Division, Karnataka, the Chief Engineer (General) and the Accounts Officer, O and M Division, all of the Karnataka Electricity Board. Respondent No. 5 is the State of Karnataka through the Secretary, Department of Public Works Department and the respondent No. 6 is Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Energy, Government of India. The case of the appellants was inter alia that in 1966 the Government of Karnataka had undertaken the Sharvathy Valley Hydro Electric Protect in the State of Karnataka. It had planned for constructing a hydro- electric generating system to generate a large quantity of electric power. The State was anticipating the generation of large surplus power. The aluminium industry particularly the smelter plant requires a large quantity of power for manufacturing operation. The Karnataka State Electricity Board), (hereinafter referred to as Board) and the State of Karnataka (hereinafter referred to as State) had invited the Indian Aluminium Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Company) to establish its aluminium smelter plant within the State of Karnataka by assuring that uninterrupted supply of electricity would be given to the smelter plant. Accordingly the Company established a factory with its smelter plant at Belgaum.

3. There was a tripartite agreement entered into between the Company, the Board and the State on March 26, 1966. Later on, a fresh tripartite agreement was entered into between the parties in modification of the aforesaid tripartite agreement and the latter agreement was entered into on August 7,1976. In the said tripartite agreements several clauses were incorporated to ensure uninterrupted supply of power and there were also provisions for supply of power at concessional rates.

4. The State promulgated the Electricity Supply Karnataka (Amendment) Ordinance, 1980 purporting to amend Section 49 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948.