- (1.)The State of Madhya Pradesh had instituted the present proceeding i.e. Original Suit No. 6 of 2004 seeking following reliefs:
(a) Call for the records relating to the impugned Notifications/Orders dated 2.11.2004 and 4.11.2004 and declare the same as null and void as the same is unconstitutional and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution;

(b) Direct 1st Defendant to dissolve MPEB in consonance with other orders/directions dated 12.4.2001, 4.12.2001 and 23.5.2003 passed by the 1st Defendant under Section 58(4) of MPRA;

(c) Direct the 1st Defendant by way of mandatory injunction to perform its constitutional and the statutory duty to lay down proper criteria for apportionment of assets, rights and liabilities in accordance with law and to ensure equitable, just, fair and reasonable apportionment of assets, rights and liabilities amongst the successor Boards on the basis of revenue potential so as to avoid undue hardship and disadvantage to any of the successor Boards; and

(d) Pass any other order and/or direction, as this Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

A preliminary objection to the maintainability of the suit was raised on behalf of the 2nd Defendant - State of Chhattisgarh on the ground that the same would not be maintainable in view of the decision rendered by this Court in a Writ Petition filed by the Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board being Writ Petition (Civil) No. 675 of 2004 (M.P. State Electricity Board v. Union of India and Ors., 2006 10 SCC 736, raising the same issues as in the present suit. The said issues have been negative by this Court by the aforesaid judgment.

(2.)As the said question i.e. of maintainability of an Original Suit in view of the earlier decision in a writ proceeding was pending before the Constitution Bench in Original Suit No. 3 of 2006 (State of Tamil Nadu v. State of Kerala and Anr.), the proceedings in this case were deferred by Order dated 12th February, 2013, to await the judgment of the Constitution Bench. The Constitution Bench judgment has been now pronounced on 7th May, 2014, which is [Original Suit No. 3 of 2006 - State of Tamil Nadu v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2014 6 Scale 380].
(3.)Before we proceed to consider the preliminary objection raised on behalf of the 2nd Defendant and the arguments advanced in this regard by the learned Counsel for the parties, it will be necessary to notice the prayers made in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 675 of 2004 filed by the M.P. State Electricity Board. The same have been set out in the reported decision in M.P. State Electricity Board , which is to the following effect:
"(a) call for records of the proceedings of the Central Government relating to the notifications/orders dated 12-4-2001,26-12-2001,23-5-2003,2-11-2004 and 4-11-2004 passed by the Ministry of Power, Government of India;

(b) quash the impugned notifications/orders dated 2-11-2004 and 4-11-2004 being unconstitutional and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.

(c) direct Respondent 1 to dissolve MPEB in consonance with the orders/directions dated 12-4-2001, 4-12-2001 and 23-5-2003 passed by the Government of India under Section 58(4) of the Madhya Pradesh Reorganisation Act;

(d) direct Respondent I to perform its constitutional and statutory duty to lay down proper criterion for apportionment of assets, rights and liabilities in accordance with law and to ensure equitable, just, fair and reasonable apportionment of assets, rights and liabilities amongst the successor Boards on the basis of revenue potential so as to avoid undue hardship and disadvantage to any of the successor Boards; and

(e) pass any other order and/or direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."