Lakshman Uraon, J. - (1.) M/s. Raj Ceramics Pvt. Ltd., Hardag, Ranchi, petitioner -appellant, has preferred this appeal, being aggrieved by the order dated 16.3.2000 passed by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 2945/1998 (R) whereby and whereunder, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ application of the petitioner -appellant on the ground that it is squarely covered by the judgment passed in CWJC No. 1559/1999 (R).
(2.) The petitioner -appellant filed a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 2945/1998 (R) praying therein for issuance of an appropriate writ or a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent. Electricity Board, to exempt the petitioner from payment of annual minimum guarantee charges for the period of five years from the date of its coming into commercial production after expansion of its unit from 15.3.1994 in pursuance to 1993 industrial policy and also by the resolution taken by Energy Department, State of Bihar on 2.9.1996 (P) for issuance of appropriate writ directing the respondents to refund/adjust the amount of AMG charges already realised from the petitioner with effect from 15.3.1994 and also prayed for quashing the annual minimum guarantee bills for 1994 -95, 1995 -96, 1996 -97 and 1997 -98 since the petitioner is not liable to pay AMG char, -ges in view of Industrial Policy 1993 and also under the resolution taken by the Energy Department, State of Bihar. Subsequently the petitioner - appellant had also filed an amendment petition with a prayer for issuance of writ or a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order passed by the GM -cum -Chief Engineer, respondent No. 2, who dismissed the claim of the petitioner for exempting from payment of AMG charges for the period of 5 years with effect from 15.4.1994 and also prayed for quashing that part of the bill for the month of January 2000 in which the effect of the aforementioned order has been given and the respondents are asking to realize a sum of Rs. 2,10,246/ - on account of AMG charges for the aforesaid period.
(3.) The appellant -petitioner has a small scale factory at Hardag, Ranchi, which was initially having a low tension connection and subsequently he entered into a fresh agreement with the respondents -Board in 1993 for supply of high tension electric energy having connected load of 80 KVA. Under the industrial policy, 1993, various facilities were given to the industries including the facility with regard to the power by way of granting exemption from payment of AMG charges for the new industrial unit having a connection load up to 500 KVA. Further the case of the petitioner -appellant is that in pursuance to that industrial policy the respondents -Board, took a resolution on 3.9.1996 that those industries which came into production from 1.4.1993 to 31.8.2000 would be exempted from payment of AMG charges for the period of five years from the date of its having electric connection. The petitioner's unit came into production between 1.4.1993 to 31.8.2000 and therefore he is entitled to get incentive under the expansion and diversification. The petitioner -appellant has further stated that he received AMG bills for the period from 1994 to 1998 and against those bills entire payment has been made expect for the period 1995 -96 and 1996 -97 against which the petitioner paid 50% and 25% respectively pursuant to the order of this Court. The petitioner appellant filed a representation before respondent No. 2 for grant of exemption but the same remained pending and was not disposed of. During the pendency of the writ application the said representation was disposed of on 28.1.2000. Hence the petitioner filed an amendment petition making an additional prayer for quashing the impugned order dated 28.1.2000. The learned Single Judge after hearing the learned counsel for both the parties came to the findings that the case of this petitioner is squarely covered by a decision given in a similar case of M.K. Refractories v/s. BSEB and Ors., [CWJC No. 1559/99(R)] in which this Court in similar circumstances held that the consumers having connected load up to 500 KVA are not entitled to the benefit under the policy and accordingly the writ application of this petitioner -appellant was dismissed.;