WRIT PETITION 2436 of 2000 on 12 February 1999

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICftTURE _ftT JftBftLPUBMRIT S'ETITJON N0_.A^ 3 ^OF 2000PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 ^F THE^QNSTITUTIONOF,INDIfiRudra Cemen't Limited,Pandri Pani,GeedamRoad,JflGDALPUR(M.P.).•kor.throughShr-j.P.R^Agra^al ,Dirsc' .................................... .F'ETITI OMERVERSUSMadhyaF'radeshElectricityBoard ^through itsSsc r'is'bs^v BRaaipur,JfiBALPUR£>;ecutiveDir&ctor(JR),1'ladhyaPradeshElectricityBoard.JfiGDALPUR(M.P.).......RESPDNDENTS1.Particulars otthe oetj.tj.Qner:Asthe causetitle above.per2.Fartlculars ofthe rssoondents;;Asthecau'setitle above.perParticulars ofthe order asaainst whichthi'!3etxti.an_ 1sffiadss ^i'^l ~K

H!

w\I!I!

w\I!I!i:lfll-S III

KlttJI

HIGH COURT OF CHHATT1SGARH AT BILASPURS£: Hon'bte Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra. J.Writ Petition No. 2436/2000

PETITIONER :Rudra Cement LimltedVersusVersus RESPONDENTSMadhya Pradesh Electricity Board and another Shri Vlshnu Koshta, counsel for the petitioner.

ORALORDER(3.08.2012)

This writ peb'tion has been preferred praying issuance of command to therespondent to setBe the aecount of ttie petitfoner/company as requested by it and toprovide 3 phase LT line at the untt.

(2) According to the petHioner the company has established a mini c^nent ptantat Jagdalpur and there was some delay in execution of project consequent to whichpetitioner applied for reduction of contract demand.

?)In para 5.4 of the writ petition it is averred tfiat tt»e petffioner closed tfiecement plant on 12/02/1999 and requested for disconnection of elecAietfy supply.The said request was alfowed, however account was not srttted and berause of thisnon-settlement of account 3 phase LT line to the petitioner unit was also notprovided.(4)This writ petition is pending since April, 2000 and no one appears on behalfof respondente.

(5) In the return filed by the respondents it has been submitted that in terms ofSection 28 (B) of the agreennent the consumer is required to serve at teast threemonths nofee before requesting for disconnection of suppfy and till final dedsion inthe matter fs taken by the competent authortty, billing as per provteion af HTagreement executed shatl continue and then the petBioner is requiresl to .E»yaiftount of Rs.5,09,232/- in temis of the agreement.

(6) In view of the return since there is conti^rtual dispute briween the parties,the writ pefition is disposed of with a direction to the petffioner to approach tteconcerned authority along wtth Ws grievance (w settlement of account and if thepetitiorier approaches the said authority wittiin a period of fajr weeks from today,the authority concerned shall settle the account in accordance witti syreementwithin a period oftwo months thereafter.

(7) If any grievance still subsists, peb'tioner may tak®recouree under ths termsofHTagreement.

(8) With the above observafion, the writ petition stands disposed ®f. _^_-L

Sd/-Prashant Kumar MishraJudge