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

2022 Supreme(Guj) 1813

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.B.PARDIWALA, NIRAL R. MEHTA, JJ.
Gujarat Electricity Board – Appellant
Versus
Reliance Industries Ltd & others – Respondents
R/First Appeal No. 1610 of 2004
Decided on : 11-03-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MR SN SHELAT SENIOR COUNSEL WITH MS LILU K BHAYA
For the Respondent: MR MIHIR JOSHI, MR SIRAJ R GORI

Headnote:(A) Electricity Regulatory Commission Act, 1998 - Section 22 - Gujarat Electricity Board constituted under Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 - Jurisdiction and authority to determine tariff - GEB’s issuance of Circular No.687 and corrigendum as without jurisdiction, leading to the demand for excess drawal of power being deemed invalid. (Paras 30, 36, 56, 88)

(B) Tariff determination - Functions and powers of the State Commission - Tariff includes charges for excess drawal of power; any change to it must be made by the Commission following legal guidelines, not by unilateral action. (Paras 22, 30, 36, 40)

(C) Principle of Res Judicata - Findings from Petition No.71 apply to Petition No.70, with implications for the appeal regarding circulars issued by GEB in contravention of established tariff rules. (Paras 1, 56)

Facts of the case:
The appeal arises from GEB's response to excess drawal tariff imposed on Reliance Industries Ltd. The Commission ruled against GEB’s authority to enforce its Circular No.687 and aimed to recover excessive charges, leading to a refund directive.

Findings of Court:
GEB’s excess drawal circulars deemed illegal; refund ordered for amounts recovered under those circulars, confirming the jurisdiction and powers of the State Commission.

Issues: The court addressed the legality of GEB’s tariff circulars post-establishment of the State Commission and the implications of res judicata on the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: The court established that the State Commission is the sole authority for tariff determination and that GEB’s circulars were not legally valid following the commission's formation, reaffirming the legal parameters within which GEB operates.

Result: Appeal dismissed, GEB ordered to refund excessive charges.

Table of Content
1. facts related to the establishment and operation of electricity supply. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. arguments from the appellant regarding tariff authority. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
3. respondent's arguments opposing the appellant’s claims. (Para 24 , 25 , 26)
4. court’s observations on tariff jurisdiction and regulatory authority. (Para 29 , 30 , 36 , 46)
5. supreme court rulings on determination of tariffs. (Para 37 , 39)
6. dismissal of the appeal with no order as to costs. (Para 58)

JUDGMENT :

J.B.PARDIWALA, J.

1. This appeal under Section 27 of the ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION ACT , 1998 (for short, “the Act, 1998”) is at the instance of the Gujarat Electricity Board being the original respondent before the Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission, Ahmedabad and is directed against the common order passed by the Commission dated 6th September 2002 declaring the levy and the collection of charges @ 3 times of demand charges on excess drawal of power under clause 15 of the Commercial Circular No.687 dated 21st December 1998 and the revised Commercial Circular No.687-A dated 26th October 1999 resply as without jurisdiction. The Commission also directed the appellant - GEB to refund the amount recovered from the respondent herein under the two circulars referred to above for the period between 1998 and October 1999 with interest @ 6% per annum.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be summarised as under:

3. The appellant - Gujarat Electricity Board came to be constituted by the State Government under Section 5 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 (for short, “the Supply Act”). It is a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal. The appellant - Board is engaged in generating, distributing and supplying electrical energy to the consumers and licensees.

4. The respondent No.1 – M/s. Reliance Industries Limited is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, “the Act, 1956”) and is engaged in the business of manufacturing petrochemicals at its plant situated at village : Mora on the Surat Hazira Road.

5. It is the case of the appellant - Board that it has been supplying electrical energy to the plant of the respondent No.1. As there was a huge demand for electrical power in Gujarat and other parts of the country and the Board was not in a position to cope with such demand, the Government of Gujarat formulated a power policy levying the private participation in the installation of generator sets. Under the said policy, the industrial units were to be permitted to set up their own Captive Power Plant (CPP) to meet with their requirements.

6. In pursuance of the power policy announced by the Government of Gujarat in December 1995, the Government of Gujarat, Energy and Petrochemicals Department, by its resolution dated 9th November 1998 declared the policy for supply of surplus electrical power to a group of companies. The said resolution dealt with the contract demand. It provides that the industries on commissioning of the CPP would be allowed to reduce their original contract demand (i.e. if the contract demand is of 1000 KVA, then it could be reduced to any level upto 250 KVA depending upon the need of the consumers) when they intend to have parallel operation with the Grid.

7. The demand of power from the State Grid by the industrial unit was subjected to the applicable tariff of the licensee.

8. In view of the State Government Resolution referred to above laying down the power policy, the appellant - Board, vide its resolution No.10374 provides that any excess drawal of power from the contract demand would be charged at the rate which would be 3 times of the demand charges of applicable HT tariff per KWA and the energy charges would be charged at the applicable HT tariff.

9. On the strength of the Captive Power Policy, which came into force w.e.f. 9th November 19

            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 Back to top