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

1972 Supreme(All) 220

SATISHCHANDRA, A.BANERJI
Hari Shankar – Appellant
Versus
U. P. State Electricity Board – Respondent


Advocates:
K.L. Grower, for Petitioners; V.K. Mehrotra and Standing Counsel, for Respondents.

Judgement

SATISH CHANDRA, J. :- A learned Single Judge felt doubtful about the correctness of the view taken by Hon'ble G.C. Mathur, J., in Civil Misc. Writ Petn. No. 6428 of 1970 Zila Power Upbhokta Sangh v. Union of India (decided on 26-4-1972) (All) about the construction of term traiff contained in Section 49 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. He referred the entire writ petition to a larger Bench although the writ petition raises several other questions as well.

2. The petitioners entered into an agreement with the U.P. State Electricity Board for the supply of electrical energy for small scale industry purposes. The agreement provided that the petitioners will pay a minimum guarantee at the rate of Rs. 66/- per year per B.H.P. On 25th June, 1968, the State Electricity Board published a notification increasing the minimum guarantee rate to Rs, 96/- per year per B. H. P. By another notification of November 27, 1968 the minimum guarantee charges were further increased to Rs. 120/- per year per B.H.P. The petitioners did not pay the minimum guarantee charges demanded by the Board, as a result whereof the Board started proceedings for its recovery as arrears of land revenue. The











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