SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Chh) 42

YATINDRA SINGH, SUNIL KUMAR SINHA
Monnet Ispat & Energy Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. The main question involved in these writ petitions relates to the validity of Rule 3(1)(a)(ii) of the Electricity Rules, 2005 (the Rules).

THE FACTS

2. Monnet Ispat and Energy Limited (the petitioner) is a public company registered under the Companies Act. It entered into Memorandum of Understanding (the MOU) with the State of Chhattisgarh on 21.05.2001, by which it was supposed to set up units to manufacture sponge iron, steel structural rolling mill, and ferro alloys at Raigarh (the Raigarh-unit) and Raipur (the Raipur-unit) districts. Subsequently, another MOU was entered on 04.05.2007, by which the petitioner was required to further invest in the units.

3. By the MOUs, the petitioner was also permitted to establish Captive Generating Plants (CGPs) at both places, referred to as the Raipur-CGP and the Raigarh-CGP.

4. The petitioner had planned to set the CGPs along with the units. The CGPs were installed but due to recession, the units could not be installed to their full capacity. The result was they could not utilise the electricity generated by the CGPs to extent it was supposed to do.

5. In order to use the electricity generated by the CGPs, the petitioner entered































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top