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

2016 Supreme(MP) 117

P.K.JAISWAL, JARAT KUMAR JAIN
Ritspin Synthetics Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Brian D'Silva with A.K. Upadhyay for petitioner;
P. Bhargava, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No.1, 3 and 4;
D.S. Pawar for respondents No.2 and 5.

ORDER

Jaiswal, J. -- 1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the notification dated 17.5.1995 (Annexure P-4), issued under section 3B of the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Duty Act, 1949, on the ground that, it was opposed to the principles of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India as the same is discriminatory as it forms a class amongst class, therefore, the said notification was bad in law and is ultra vires to the Constitution of India. The petitioner has also sought the quashment of orders dated 9.1.2013 and 8.5.2013, passed by the respondent No.3 and prayed for refund of the extra electricity duty amount of of Rs.67,40,606/-, including the surcharge levied to the petitioner together with the interest.

2. The petitioner is a private limited company, owing what is described as a spinning mill at Pithampur, District Dhar. The petitioner claims to be manufacturing ‘man made fabrics’ in this mill and to work a factory license has been issued by the Government of M.P vide Annexure P-3, for manufactur


































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