IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2010 " BEE' ORE THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE _ WRIT PE'I'I'I'ION No.259i8/240.16'--z_GM~I§B:Bj" ' V BETWEEN: M/ s. Deepam Silk Internatifinai.' V " Partnership Firm _ ' 5' Having its Registered Office...» _ ' At No.67, M.G. V Bangalore - 560 V . V _V " Rep.:byits V Sri.M.''Vijayashe£§aeifa ' ' . PETITIONER (By Sn. Kfi;¥r§bar_," ' A_dv.__j" ' V' A. V-'Katnaiaka Poxixrex-"T1'ansrnission Corporaiion Limited T "Ca'm_rer_\fn'5fh'a5van ._ Bang"aloreVV':380 009 A V 'Repi its Chairman & Managing Director 'I'he Aseistant Executive Engineer (E1) .. E3"Si1b-Dixrision "M.G. Road, Bangalore M 560 001 RESPONDENTS
Sri. N.K. Gupta, Adv.)
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and of
the Constitution of India praying to quash the order passes ,
by R-2 dated 23.6.2010 vide Ar1neXure–E and etc.
This petition coming on for Preliminary. ‘B’
Group this day, the Court made the fO1]OVVil1’b;- – ”
ORDER 0′
I have heard learned Counsel’V0’for the par’§;ies;’v’:
2. The petitioner thevifalidity of
the notices at Annexure-E by the
2nd respondent;i{T.calli§n;g pay a sum of
Rs.14,7o,3’e1 towards.Vshortjciaim demand and also the
notice at Annexuregt} 24.07.2010 informing the
that if it “ails.~to pay the amount in accordance
notice at Annexure-E, the power supply will
‘ 0’ be disconnected to its premises.
.’3″.—- Lcalnéd Counsel for the petitioner would contend
as per” the order of this Court in W.P. No.23-91/2000
ll
c/W. WP. No.3396 81 19508/2000 disposed of on 27.2V,2.oo:§,
the petitioner is entitled for incentives till the date 70: t
the said writ petitions. The demand made in_.£Lr1ne:;ure–E is”
not in conformity with the said order_.: It ‘rur+.;1e:; T
that during the pendency of the r5’et_itions,
has deposited a sum of — the
interim order in the anrotintdvvhas not
been taken into account as per
AnneXure–E.
N.K. Gupta, learned
Counseihfor the has sought to justify the
demand made .Vinvnotice’:~_ at …iinnexnres–E and G respectively.
:Vis«,.._eVident from the order of this Court at
Az’~’x’;*.r;ne;2_.:ure.V~«’>:l3:3bV_2 the petitioner was entitled for incentives
‘ till the date offiling of the said writ petitions. In paragraph-
” ofTthe..said order, this Court has observed as under:
(
‘ii13%§£
” Keeping in View the mistake on the pat of
the respondents and also the investment made
by the petitioners for conversion from LT to
propose to hold that so far as the incentives:”–..1″‘*-at ‘7’
already extended to the petitioners » .. ‘::are’-ii <
concerned they are entitled «.vin._ce~n'ti\fe's_
and they are not entitled dddfuirthert.
incentives granted by Virtue'-of conversion"urid_'er..
Regulation 7' in future froln' date: of
Petitions. " _ _
6. It is aiso_ evident:Vfro’n1:>theV’~ filed by the
petitioner at:Anne)h:_ire–F petitioner has deposited a
sum of iriiobedience of the interim order
passed bythis ‘ writ petitions. The 2nd
respondent hag~.,tQ’ pass’ a {fresh order keeping in mind the
51-d§1+’~ 2nd respondent should also take into
Eaccount V.” said to have been deposited by the
petitio_ner..~ ~’i’h’erefore, I deem it proper to direct the parties to
treat Aranexures–E and G as show cause notices. The
V’ pV.’p.e’titioi’ier is permitted to file its objections to the said show
it
C
cause notices at Am1exures~E and G within two weeks
today and the 2nd respondent is directed to cons_i’cie1″..’u’i}’.d1_:t’:’V§’
same and pass appropriate orders thereon of it
eight weeks from the date of receipt t1fie’po_§3’jectio’ns§’–oV
the disposal of the matter as above, thAe”‘respopnde1its”are’
directed not to precipitate the Wr_it”‘rpetitioriV is
disposed of accordingly. ‘oQsts_’.”dHfl_ ‘Id;
iuaqe
Cs