Back
KERALA HIGH COURT
, J
M/s. INDSIL Electrosmelters Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State Government and KSEB – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges royalty order. (Para 1 , 2 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. government policy on small hydel projects. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 20) |
| 3. agreement terms with kseb regarding royalty. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. changes in governmental order related to claims. (Para 19 , 21 , 27 , 28) |
| 5. arguments against the imposition of royalty. (Para 29 , 30) |
| 6. observations on maintainability of the writ petition. (Para 32 , 34 , 36) |
| 7. discrimination based on project type. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 8. arguments regarding controlled release and royalty. (Para 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 9. court's reasoning on royalty as tax vs charge. (Para 73 , 74 , 76) |
| 10. promissory estoppel argument by the petitioner. (Para 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 100) |
| 11. conclusion and order of the writ petition. (Para 104 , 106) |
1. In this writ petition filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner - company has assailed the order passed by the Government of Kerala whereby it was directed to levy royalty and the cost component of controlled release of water to Kuthungal Hydro Electric Project on the water utilised by it and it has been quantified that the royalty shall be collected at the rate of 10% of th
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
