Patna High CourtCWJC/15599/2013disposed

Jai Ram Prasad v. The Bihar State Electricity Board And ORS

2015-09-11Mr. Justice Samarendra Pratap Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15599 of 2013 ====================================================== Jai Ram Prasad Son Of Late Daho Mahto Resident Of Mohalla - Aashanagar, P.S. Sohsarai, District - Nalanda .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Bihar State Electricity Board Through Chairman, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

2. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

3. Financial Controller, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

4. The G.M.-Cum-Chief Engineer, Central Area Electricity Board, Daroga Ram Path, Patna

5. The Electrical Superintening Engineer, Electric Supply Circle, Biharsharif, Nalanda

6. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Biharsharif, Nalanda .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Ranjan Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-09-2015 The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who runs Aasha Nagar Cold Storage, Sohsarai, Nalanda, for release of remission amount of Rs.61,805.16 for the year 2000-01 and Rs.86,917.00 for the year 2002-03 (Total Rs. 1,47,722.16) with interest thereon.

The petitioner submits that on his representation, the General Manager cum Chief Engineer found that the petitioner is entitled for the remission under Clause 13 of HT agreement. He submits that during pendency of the writ petition, he has been paid the remission amount of Rs.1,47,722/- but belatedly after 11 to 12 years without interest for which he has also filed

Patna High Court CWJC No.15599 of 2013 (2) dt.11-09-2015 2/2 representation. The petitioner further submits that now the nature of energy has been converted into HT category to LTIS category.

Counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner himself approached the Court for getting interest on delayed payment of remission amount after nine years of passing order. In the circumstances, if the petitioner files representation before respondent no.3 for payment of interest part, the same would be disposed of within three months from thereof by speaking order.

The writ petition is disposed of.

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J) Shashi.