LexROHTAS INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR. ETC. versus THE CHAIRMAN BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
'-. • . -... • ROHTAS INDUSTRIES LTD. &,ANR. ETC. v • . THE CHAIRMAN; BIHAR-STATE ELECTRICITY· ' . BOARD AND OTHERS - March 2, 1984 - [D. A. DESAI AND V. BALAKRISHNA ERADi, JJ] ,,Efectricity (SU]Jply) Ac1,-·-194a2s. -49-Electricity .Board divided corisume;s into various cateiories-_Co~sunzerS of only those cafliories ~/ready enjoying conces-- sion in general tari..tr as incentive to esrab/is/;·;ndl;Strjes in the State asked io pay fuel surchatge-;-Whether classification of consun1ers and levy_ of fuel ~su~char;e o,n - some consumers only qrbitrary and violqtive of Art . . 14 of the Constit~tion. , Section 49 of tlie. Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 provided for the .sale of" electricity by the electricity. Board lto any- pefson · not being· a liceflsee · and to fr.ime. uniform. tariffs . for the purposes of such . supply " having. ~egafd~ · .. inter alia ~ to - the_': ii.at~re of the.··. supply,. ·. the purPose1.for which the. supply_ is required· and other_. relevant factprs, In exercise ofthc po_wef-s conferrCd 0 ·by s. 49.'.'ofthe Act, "the responden~ Bihar State ElcciriCity Board bad classified the Consumers irito ten· catego~ics and had . ,_been, from timt;. to time, issuing notifiC.ltiOns· :fixing the tariff 'and the tefms and conditions· for the ~uppJy of-- electricity) .ro~those consulners. With a· vieW to -encouraging the tst~blishment of industrieS in the State, the general tariff r3:te f applicable in respeCt of high tension supply to industries and factories had been fixed at rates which were muc;h lower ~'hen ·comparea: to thoSe applicable to other . · __ -tyPes of consumers. On 6.4. 1979 the_· respop.d_en_t Board, in. sui)ers_ession of ~ts earlier notification fixing the tariff, isSUed a notifiCation revising the tariff for all categories of consumers served by it. Para 16.7 ·of the .-said Tariff Notification provided that the consumers of low tension indu-stiial service~ high tetision ser· vice, eXtra high tension service, and. railway traction Service shall be liable to pay ,fuel surcharge'. at a rate to be determined.every year J~ acCordance with lthc fc;:>r• -. mula set out in sub-para 2 of that paragraph. The appelJants who had entei-ed into agreements with the respondent Board for the supply of high tension electric . current fcrr their factories. arid \vere admittedly nOt lice"nsees, filed writ petitions in the High Cou;'.t thaIIenging the levy. of fuel surchafge on the grouned that it \ ; was arbitrary and devoid of legal sanction.· A Division Bench of the High Court .di!missed' the writ petitions·. '-Hence these, appCals -and- ·special leaVe petitions.· : The appCnanu~·charge of discrimination was_ based On the_- groulld that only . ~nsumers of low tension industrial service high tension service~ extra high ten-· ~ s1on serviCe, and railway traction service had been singled out for being subjected ·':to a Jevy of surcharge, '?'.'bile consumers of -elec-tricity for. dome'stic, commercial -- and irrigation purposes were left unaffected by any such burden: · .... 'Dismissing the appeals.and special leave petitions,.- · .. _ - . - . - - . - . - ·A .a E F G: HELD;It Is ;,ell-established tba; where a corporation is an . instr;,,;,eniallty H . or an age~cy of Government it would, in the exorcise of Its powers and function, - ~- . ;" .. B 'c. 60 . SUPREME COURT JlFPORrS • . . R. [1984] 3 s.c .. • be subject to the same c.Onstitutlonal or public law &Hmit~tioa~ ·as apply -to the Government and the principle of law inhibitin& arbitrary ·Action by Government · would apply equally where such a corporation is dealing with the public, Whether by way of giving jobs or entering into relationship with any person in any manner.it likes according to its sv.1eet will. The acts of such a. coiporation must be in conformity with so~e principle which · ineets the test of reaso.nableness · and relevence. (71 F-H] - ' · -The-contention that the imposition ·or fuel surcharge under paragraph :16.7 of the 1979 tariff notification is arbirary and violative of Art. 14 of the Cons ti tu~ - tion has no fofce. -The BOard was Perfectly within its rights- in deciding to ---r.estrici _the levy of fuel suriJiai&-e to those categories of consumers who were enjoying the-benefit of.a concession in the general rate and ill sparing Smaller \type of consumers such as tile agricultural irrigation and commercial consumers frdm being subjected to that
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.