LexPTC INDIA LTD. versus CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION THR. ITS SECRETARY
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 4 S.C.R. 134 A PTC INDIA LTD. B v. CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION THR. ITS SECRETARY Civil Appeal No. 3902 of 2006 MARCH 6, 2009 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, HARJIT SINGH BEDI AND ASOK KUMAR GANGULY,JJ.] Electricity Regulatory Commission Act, 1998 - s. 27 - C Appellate court under - Jurisdiction - Scope of - Order of Central Electricity Regulatory Commission and Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Fixation of Trading Margin) Regulations, 2006 - Challenge to - Order of appellate tribunal that it has no jurisdiction, relying on West Bengal D Electricity Regulatory Commission v. CESC Ltd. case - On appeal, held: Matter referred to larger Bench as regard applicability of West Bengal Electricity case to matters under the 2003 Act; and jurisdiction of tribunal to decide the validity of the Regulations - Electricity Act, 2003 - Central Electricity E Regulatory Commission (Fixation of Trading Margin) Regulations, 2006. West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission v. CESC Ltd. 2002 (8) SCC 715; Clariant International Ltd. and Anr. v. F Securities and Exchange Board of India 2004 (8) SCC 524; Cellular Operators Association of India and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. 2003 (3) SCC 186; National Sewing Thread Co. Ltd. v. James Chadwick and Bros. Ltd. 1953 SCR 1028 - referred to. G H Case Law Reference 2004 (8) SCC 524 · Referred to. 2003 (3) SCC 186 Referred to. 134 Para 7 Para 8 CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION THR ITS SECRETARY 1953 SCR 1028 2002 (8) sec 715 Referred to. Referred to. Para 9 Para 10 135 CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3902 of 2006 · A From the Judgement and Order dated 28.04.2006 of the 8 Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, New Delhi, inter alia, in Appeal No. 45 of 2006. WITH \_; Civil Appeal Nos. 4354/2006, 4355/2006, 2875/2007, C Civil Appeal D. 9870/2007, SLP (C) No.22080/2005, __ Civil Appeal Nos. 7437/2005, 7438/2005, 2073/2007, 1471/2007, - 2166/2007. Manish Singhvi, AAG, Harish N. Salve, Vikas Singh, P.S. 0 Narasimha, Shanti Bhushan, Amit Kapur, Appprva Misra, Vibha Dutta Makhija, Shrivenketesh Singh, Meenakshri Grover, Mansoor Alo Shoket, Anupam Verma, A.G. Sharma, Poonam Verma, Shreshth Sharma, Sanjeev Kumar, Abhinash Menon, . Kumar Mihir, Vishal Gupta (Mis. Khaitan & Co.) Sridhar Potaraju, E Prakeik Dhar, C.K. Rai, Julius, D.K. Sinha, M.G. Ramachandran, K.V. Mohan, Anand K. Ganesm, S. Sheshdari, Ajit Bhasme, · Varun Thakur, Brajesh Kumar, Vivek Kishore, Ruchi Gaur Narule, Sangeeta Bharti Rakesh K. Sharma, G. Umapathy, Vibhu Tiwari, Rakesh K. Sharma, Nikhit Nayyar, T.V.S. Raghvendra Sreyas, Ambuj Agrawal, Pradeep Misra, Daleep Dhyani, Suraj Singh, F Mayur Kumar, K.R. Sasiprabhu, K.V. Mohan, H.K. Puri, R. Nedumaran, Suresh Chandra Tripathy, Sharmila Upadhayay, Ashish Kumar, Shibhashish Misra, for the appearing partie$. The Judgement of the Court was delivered by . G DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. In these appeals and special leave petition, challenge in each case is.to the order passed by the AppellateTribunal for Electricity (in short the 'Tribunal'). Challenge before the H j 136 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 4 S.C.R. A Tribunal was to the order/decision dated 23.1.2006 of the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (in short the 'CERC') and the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Fixation of Trading Margin) Regulations, 2006 (in short the 'Regulations') published in the Gazette of India on 27.1.2006. The Tribunal by B the impugned judgment held that it has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. For this purpose the Tribunal placed reliance on a three-Judge Bench decision of this Court in West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission v. CESC Ltd. (2002 (8) sec 715). The conclusion in the said decision was to the effect c that the High Court sitting as an Appellate Court under Section 27 of the Electricity Regulatory Commission Act, 1998 (in short '1998 Act') has no jurisdiction to go into the validity of the Regulations. It was ultimately held that there is weighty authority for the proposition that a Tribunal which is a creature of the statute 0 cannot question the vires of the provisions under which it functions. 2. Questioning correctness of the said view the present appeals have been filed. It has been contended that the decision in West Bengal Electricity case (supra) has no application to E the present case. The Regulations have been framed
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.