Ramesh Saluja v. The Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.7560 of 2015 dt.10-10-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7560 of 2015 =========================================================== Ramesh Saluja son of Late Nanak Singh, Resident of Gurudwara Road, P.S.- Kotwali, P.O.- Gaya, District- Gaya .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Bihar State Power ( Holding) Company Limited, through its Chairmancum-Managing Director

2. The South Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited, Gaya through its Managing Director-cum-Chairman

3. The India Power Corporation (Bodh Gaya) Limited, through its Chairmancum-Managing Director, C-3/C-4 DVC Colony, Chandauti, Gaya

4. The Assistant Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Sub-Division, Bodh Gaya

5. The Assessing Officer (Vigilance), India Power Corporation (Bodh Gaya) Limited, C-3/C-4 DVC Colony, Chandauti, Gaya

6. The Junior Electrical Engineer Electric Supply Section, Gaya Rural, DistrictGaya .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Shyameshwar Kumar Singh, Sr. Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Sr. Advocate. Mr. Akhileshwar Singh, Advocate.

Mr. Vijay Kumar Verma, Advocate.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 10-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing of the impugned Provisional Assessment dated 25.11.2014 drawn by the Indian Power Corporation (Bodh Gaya) Limited, (hereinafter referred to as "India Power") against the petitioner whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been communicated to

Patna High Court CWJC No.7560 of 2015 dt.10-10-2018 pay a sum of Rs. 7,09,555/-; further to immediately refund the amount of Rs. 50,000/- to the petitioner which has been deposited by the petitioner and for refund of the amount already paid towards the said demand.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the very outset makes a statement at the Bar that the dispute between the parties has now been amicably settled and a joint compromise petition has been filed before the learned Court below and as such the present writ petition need not be pressed.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent-Power Company appears and has been heard.

5. Having regard to the stand of the petitioner aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 10.10.2018 Transmission Date N.A.