JMT Auto Ltd. vs Jharkhand State Electricity Board and Others

R.K. Merathia, J.—At the outset, Mr. V.K. Prasad, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents Jharkhand State Electricity Board, submitted that the matter is pending before the Supreme Court and, therefore, both these cases may be listed thereafter.

On this, Mr. Agrawal, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner in both the cases, submitted that during pendency of these cases at least the amount of fuel surcharge, recovered from the Petitioners from January 2004 to April 2004, may be refunded as the fuel surcharge was itself abolished from January 2004. He submitted that this position has been admitted in Para25 of the counter affidavit, filed on behalf of J.S.E.B. on 11/04/2011, though it is stated that such amount will be adjusted in consumer''s bill on proper verification. He further submitted that the Petitioners have severed their relationship with the Board from 2008 and, thereafter, they shifted to other licensee and, therefore, adjustment will not be practical.

The statements made in the counter affidavit could not be disputed by Mr. Prasad. However, he submitted that it is not know whether such amount has already been paid/adjusted or not.

In the circumstances, the Respondent No. 2General Managercum Chief Engineer, Singhbhum Area, Cooperative Building, Bistupur, Jamshedpur is directed to refund the amount of fuel surcharge recovered from the Petitioners from January 2004 to April 2004 within four weeks from today, if not already paid/adjusted.

For other prayer, let these cases go out of list with liberty to the parties to mention for listing of the same after the order is passed by the Supreme Court.

Let a copy of this order be handed over to Mr. V.K. Prasad, as prayed.