M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. L.K. Bajla. learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. V.P. Singh, leetrned counsel for the respondents -Board.
(2.) THIS writ application has been filed challenging the order dated 12.11.1999 passed by the General Manager -cum -Chief Engineer whereby he has rejected the claim of the petitioner under Clause 13 of the H.T. Agreement for the financial years. 1982 -83 and 1983 -84. It appears that in 1983 itself the petitioner had filed its claim under Clause 13 of the H.T. Agreement for the year, 1982 -83 and again in the year, 1984 the petitioner had filed Its claim for the year, 1983 -84. The General Manager disposed of the claim by order dated 4.12.1984. The petitioner challenged the said order before this Court in CWJC Nox. 1019/86 (R). The writ application was disposed of on 28.5,1989 whereby the, General Manager was directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner by passing a fresh order. In the meantime, the petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 26.68 lakhs approximately. The said order was, however, modified in LPA No. 292/98 (R) at the instance of the petitioner in terms of the order dated 10.11.1998 and the petitioner was directed to furnish bank guarantee instead of depositing the cash amount. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction the General Manager -cum -Chief Engineer reconsidered the matter and after giving opportunity of hearing, passed the impugned order rejecting the claim of the petitioner.
(3.) MR . Bajla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner assailed the impugned order as being illegal, arbitrary and without any application of mind. Learned counsel submitted (hat no reason has been assigned in the impugned order while rejecting the claim of the petitioner. According to the learned counsel, the General Manager has not considered the claim of the petitioner in the light of the direction of this Court in the order passed In the writ application and the letters patent appeal.;