Last Updated on January 10, 2024 by News Desk
Issue: An appeal was made against the order of the Rajasthan HC whereby it directed the state-run electricity distribution company to purchase 200MW of power from a private company in a deal that would have increased tariffs for consumers.
Analysis:- The bench of Justices BR Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra had made it clear that the writ of mandamus could not have been issued by the state HC.
The SC said that the interests of both consumers must be balanced. However, the court also stressed the fact that it would not be permissible to take a lopsided view only to protect the interest of the generators and ignore the public interest.
The court also said that it was allowed even when the bid by another supplier was low.
The SC said that the HC should not have entertained such a writ petition directly.
The court has also raised a disagreement with a connection case of APTEL, where it was concluded that there was no need for the Bid Evaluation Committee to check on whether the rates quoted by bidders are aligned with prevailing market prices once the bidding process is found to be transparent.
The court opined that any alternative interpretation would lead to the defeat of the objective of the Act, that is, the protection of the consumer.
Judgment:- The bench allowed the appeal that was made before it by the Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited and the state government and MB power were also directed to pay Rs. 5 lakhs as the litigation cost, both to the state government as well as the DISCOM.
Case Title:- Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited and ors vs MB Power Madhya Pradesh Private Limited and ors.pdf
Written By:- Shianjany Pradhan (@SHIANJANYPRADHAN)
