K C FOOD PRODUCTS Vs. COMMISSIONER, PDD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY a short order dated March 3, 1987 and March 5, 1987, I upheld the preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petitions and dismissed the same. I now proceed to give detailed reasons.

(2.) THE petitioners are the consumers of electric energy (medium scale industries, small scale industries and domestic). They have questioned the revision of electric tariff by the respondents on various grounds detailed in the petitions. The challenge to the vires of Cl. (x) of the schedule to the J&K Electricity Act, Samvat 1997, though raised in the petitions, was, however, given up during the arguments in view of the provisions of Sec. 23 of the J&K Electricity (Supply) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 1971 Act). Apart from resisting the writ petitions on merits some preliminary objections have also been raised in the counters but the main preliminary objection which was raised at the time of the arguments was to the maintainability of the petitions. According to the learned counsel for the respondents, since the petitioners have an alternate, efficacious and effective remedy as provided in Sec. 72 of the 1971 Act, their writ petitions were not maintainable. It is this preliminary objection which calls for determination at this stage.

(3.) SINCE , the preliminary objection is based on Sec. 72 of the 1971 Act, it would be profitable to notice that provision at this stage :