[2023:RJ-JD:40041]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10850/2023

Lakshya Microns, Through Prop. Pragya Jain W/o Prince Bajaj,

Age About 32 Years, R/o G-179, 11D Centre, Udaipur District

Udaipur.

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,

Department Of Energy, Government Of Rajasthan, It

Center, Chambal Power House Campus, Hawa Sarak,

Jaipur-302006.

2.

Rajasthan Electricity Regulation Commission, Through Its

Chairman, Vidhyut Viniyamak Bhawan, Sahakar Marg,

Near State Motor Garage, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302001.

3.

Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Through Its Managing

Director, Hathi Bhata, City Power House, Ajmer-305 001,

Rajasthan.

4.

The Additional Engineer (O And M), Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran

Nigam Ltd. Udaipur.

5.

The Assistant Engineer (O And M), Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran

Nigam Ltd., Udaipur.

6.

The Additional Chief Engineer (Hq), Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran

Nigam Ltd., Commercial Wing, Vidyut Bhawan,

Panchsheel Nagar, Makarwali Road, Ajmer-305004.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Arvind Vyas

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG

Mr. Rishi Soni

Mr. D.S. Sodha

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Judgment

22/11/2023

1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

controversy rests decided by judgment of the co-ordinate Bench of

[2023:RJ-JD:40041]

(2 of 3)

[CW-10850/2023]

this Court in a bunch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ

Petition No.11242/2023 (Bhansali Dyeing, Proprietorship/

partner Ravi Mehta vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on

09.11.2023.

2.

Learned counsel for the respondents does not refute the

above submission.

The Court while partly allowing the aforesaid writ petitions,

held as under:-

11. Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussion and the

observations made hereinabove, the present petitions

are partly allowed.

11.1. Accordingly, the impugned order dated

01.09.2022,alongwith the entire proceedings and

orders pursuant thereto, only to the extent of levy of

interest/carrying costs on the original principal

amount of Rs.3,048.64 Crores, so also the

interest/carrying costs amount payable towards other

heads and categories, are quashed and set aside.

Needless to say that the amount to be charged

towards special fuel surcharge can be recovered from

the consumers only to the extent of original principal

amount to the tune of Rs.3,048.64/- Crores.

11.2. This Court observes that the aforesaid order

has already covered almost all the issues in the

present litigation, however, in some of the instant

writ petitions, the order dated 13.06.2019has been

challenged and the said order is also hereby quashed

and set aside, only to the extent of the

interest/carrying costs amount payable on the

original principal amount as on the date of passing of

the said order; thus, recovery of special fuel

surcharge to be made only to the extent of the

original principal amount in pursuance of the said

impugned order on the same analogy as discussed

above for quashing the order dated01.09.2022.

During the process of making such recovery, amount,

if any, already recovered towards special fuel

surcharge from the consumers by the respondents,

the same shall be duly adjusted. Except for recovery

of the original principal amount, the entire

proceedings and orders in pursuance of the said

impugned order are also quashed and set aside.

11.3. Thus, the respondent-DISCOMS shall be

accordingly free to proceed to recover the respective

[2023:RJ-JD:40041]

(3 of 3)

[CW-10850/2023]

original principal amounts from the consumers under

the head of special fuel surcharge, strictly in

accordance with this judgment.

3.

In view of the submission made and in view of the fact that

the present matter being covered by the judgment of

Bhansali Dyeing (supra) is not refuted by learned counsel for t