High Court Jharkhand High Court

Palamau Chamber Of Commerce & vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 14 September, 2011

Jharkhand High Court
Palamau Chamber Of Commerce & vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 14 September, 2011
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                     CWJC No. 1793 of 2001
     Madhu Sudan Mittal Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board & Ors.
                         With
                      W.P(PIL) No. 4611 of 2009
     Rohit Kumar Choudhary       Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.
                         With
                  W.P.(PIL)       No.    2918      of    2010
Palamau Chamber of Commerce & Industry Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.
                         -------
          CORAM:      HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P. BHATT
                            -  -----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Aparesh Kr. Singh (A.C)
For the Respondents : Mr. A.K. Sinha, JSEB
Mr. A.K. Pandey, JSEB
Mr. R.R. Mishra, State
Mr. S. Srivastava, JSERC
Mr. Mokhtar Khan CBI

—-

Order No.220 Dated 14th September, 2011

Mr. Aparesh Kumar Singh, Amicus Curiae, has shown his

inability to appear in this case due to his personal reason, but after

knowing the personal reason, learned counsel appearing for the

Jharkhand State Electricity Board, the State and the Jharkhand State

Regulatory Commission as well as this Court are of the opinion that

Mr.Singh, Amicus Curiae, can continue to assist in this matter where

no personal interest of any body is involved, but in a public interest

litigation matter, there is no conflict of interest of learned counsel

with any of the parties, nor he has any favour or bias for any party.

Therefore, we expect that he may continue to assist this

Court in this matter.

This bulky file is not because of bulky petition but because

of the orders passed by this Court in the last ten years. If all the

orders are published, it will become a good book dealing with the

problems of electric supply in the State of Jharkhand and more

particularly only for the capital city of State of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

Be that it may be, we do not want to increase pages and
we confining to our last order dated 1.08.2011, whereby this Court

directed the Regulatory Commission to submit interim report with

respect to the measures taken for providing adequate and continuous

supply of electricity to the people of the State of Jharkhand. The

Commission was permitted to submit interim report and the

Commission, in time, submitted the interim report, which we have

perused. The Commission in its interim report submitted as under:

“The Commission feels that at present
there is no shortage of availability of power.
The problem is in the distribution network
which needs to be strengthened and proper
maintenance at regular intervals which has
been dealt with in (A) above in the report.
The Commission will continue to monitor
this.”

The above observation clearly indicates that in the opinion of

the Commission there is no shortage of power generation/supply to

the Jharkhand State Electricity Board; meaning thereby the electricity

is available but we are of the opinion that public is not getting.

Learned counsel for the Commission submitted that in a short

period of ten plus years, the Electricity Board has fourteen chairmen.

This itself is a sorry state of affairs in the matter of governance

relating to the most essential public service. Other suggestion given

by the Commission are as under:

“Besides reorganization and restructuring of JSEB, which is sub-

judice, the Commission feels that the following suggestions may have

direct impact of the overall functioning of the JSEB:

● Finalize and notify State Electricity Policy.

● Fixed tenure for the post of the Chairman of the Board.

●Board must consist of Technocrats with laid down
accountability.

● Upgradation and augmentation of transmission and
distribution network on priority.

● Perform as service provider with professional approach.
● Prefer out of Court settlement than litigation.

● Bill all collect All.

● Realization of dues from Government/Private consumers.

Thereafter, the Commission has observed as follows:

“JSEB has to improve a lot to bring its
services at the optimum level and the
Commission is also consciences of this with
limited option it has, therefore, all
endeavours are being made towards to
improve the functioning of the JSEB. The
Commission is also persuading other
licensees to apply for distribution license
and the Commission is not averse to grant
such parallel license if one fulfils the
requirements as envisaged under the Act.
The competition certainly enhances the
efficiency. Interest of bonafide consumers is
of paramount consideration for the
Commission.”

Learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of Jharkhand

State Electricity Board submitted that the Commission has submitted

the interim report and let them submit final report.

We cannot wait for that and we direct the State Electricity

Board to address on the issue with respect to the stability in the

management of the Board and to come out with State Electricity

Policy as has been desired by the Commission in its first point

requiring finalization and notification of the State Electricity Policy.

We expect that the State Electricity Board will cover all the issues

and, therefore, the State Electricity Board and the State Government

may come out with their plea whether they have framed the State

Electricity policy and, if framed, it has been reviewed to make out up-

to-date policy. If that policy is not there and yet they are desirous of

framing that policy, then what steps they are proposing for notifying

the State Electricity Policy.

We are passing this order giving an opportunity to the State

Government and the Electricity Board to take all the management in
relation to the electric supply to the public in their own hand from the

Court monitoring any Public Interest Litigation and in case there will

be no effective steps, the Court will have to continue with this Public

Interest Litigation treating that they have yet not come up to the

expectations of the Court in the matter of governance. The State and

the Electricity Board both may have their meetings to work out on the

issues referred above and submit their plea before this Court on or

before 17th October, 2011.

Learned counsel for the Regulatory Commission drew our

attention to a fact that the Commission has already framed a draft

policy in the year 2007 and the said policy has been forwarded to the

State Government. This fact may also be taken note of by the State

Government and the State Electricity Board that they have got

sufficient time in coming out the State Electricity Policy.

Put up these matters on 17.10.2011.

Let copies of this order be given to the learned Amicus Curie,

counsel for the Electricity Board and Commission.

(Prakash Tatia, C J)

(P.P. Bhatt, J)
Dey/-Alankar/-