0  01 Jan, 1970
Listen in mins | Read in mins
EN
HI

M/s Indra Powergen Pvt. Limited Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

  Chhattisgarh High Court WPC/1864/2016
Link copied!

Case Background

Bench

Applied Acts & Sections

No Acts & Articles mentioned in this case

Hello! How can I help you? 😊
Disclaimer: We do not store your data.
Document Text Version

1

AFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

WPC No. 1864 of 2016

1.M/s Indra Powergen Pvt. Limited Through Its Director, Nayanpur,

Girwarganj Industrial Area, Village Keshav Nagar, Tehsil Surajpur, District

Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.

2.Jagjeet Singh Arora, S/o Ishwar Singh Arora, Aged About 67 Years

Director of Indra Power Gen. Pvt. Limited, Hotel Mid Town, M.G. Road,

Raipur, P. S. Moudhapara, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2.State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Secretary, Department of Industries,

Naya Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan,

Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Through Its

Executive Director (Commercial) 4th Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan,

Dangania, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

5.Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency CREDA,

Through Its Managing Director, 2nd Floor, CSERC Building, Shanti Nagar,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

6.The Appellate Officer And Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

7.Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Through Its

Secretary, Having Its Regd. Office At Civil Lines, G.E. Road, Raipur,

Chhattisgarh 492001.

---- Respondents

WPC No. 448 of 2021

M/s Kalindi Power And Steel Limited A Duly Registered Company Under

The Indian Companies Act, 1956, Having Its Registered Office At 35-36,

First Floor Millennium Plaza, G.E. Road, Beside Coffee House, Raipur

Chhattisgarh. Through Its Authorized Representative, Mr. Sanjay Agrawal

S/o Late Shri Ramavtar Agrawal, Aged About 65 Years, R/o 9th South

Avenue, Chobey Colony, Raipur Chhattisgarh. P.S. Sarawati Nagar.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Energy,

Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Industries,

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh, B Block 2nd Floor,

Inrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur Atal Nagar, Chhattisgarh

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

2

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited Through Its

Executive Director (Commercial), 4th Floor, Vidyut Sewa Bhawan,

Dangania, Raipur Chhattisgarh

5.Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency (Creda)

Through Its Managing Director, 2nd Floor, Cserc Building, Shanti Nagar,

Raipur Chhattisgarh

6.Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission Through Its

Secretary, Having Its Registered Office At Civil Lines, G.E. Road, Raipur

Chhattisgarh 492001

---- Respondents

WPC No. 1621 of 2016

1.Chhattisgarh Biomass Energy Developers Association Through Its

Secretary, C/o Shivalik Power And Steel Pvt. Ltd. C-33, 3rd Floor, Ashoka

Millennium, Ring Road No. 1, Raipur, P. S. Mowa, Raipur Chhattisgarh

2.Sudha Bio Power Pvt. Limited, Formerly Sudha Agro Oil And Chemical

Industries Ltd., Through The Authorized Signatory, Mohatarai, Bilaspur,

P.S. Koni, Bilaspur, Ratanpur Road, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

3.Neeraj Power Pvt. Limited, Through Its Director 58, Gandhi Chowk, Post

Neora, District Raipur, P. S. Tilda Neora, Chhattisgarh.

4.Real Power Pvt. Limited, Formerly NRI Power Pvt. Limited Through Its

Authorized Signatory, Vrindawan, Civil Lines, Raipur, P.S. Civil Lines,

District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

5.Rukmani Power And Steel Limited, Through Its Director, Agrawal

Gudakhu Factory Campus, Ganesh Nagar, Bilaspur, P.S. Tarbahar,

District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

6.Balaji Power Pvt. Limited, Formerly Shivalik Power And Steel Pvt. Limited,

Through Its Authorized Signatory Plot No. 567-B, 568, Urla Industrial

Complex, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

7.Agrawal Vidyut, Through Its Director, Kharora Road, Village Tulsi, Post

Neora, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

---- Petitioners

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2.State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Secretary, Department of Industries,

Naya Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan,

Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Through Its

Executive Director (Commercial) 4

th

Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan,

Dangania, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

5.Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency CREDA,

Through Its Managing Director, 2nd Floor, CSERC Building, Shanti Nagar,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

6.The Appellate Officer And Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

3

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

7.Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Through Its

Secretary, Having Its Regd. Office At Civil Lines, G.E. Road, Raipur,

Chhattisgarh 492001.

---- Respondents

WPC No. 1677 of 2015

M/s R.R. Energy Limited A Company Duly Incorporated Under The

Provisions of The Companies Act, 1956, Through Its Director Shri Ashok

Agrawal, S/o Late Shri Jagmohan Das Agrawal, Aged About 48 Years,

Having Its Plant At Village And P. O. Garh Umaria, Orissa Road, P. S. Kotra

Road, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Energy,

Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh, 36/437, 1st Floor,

Bairon Bazar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3.The Tehsildar, Tehsil Pusaur, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents

WPC No. 1715 of 2016

M/s ISA Power Private Limited A Private Limited Company Having Its

Registered Office At Plot No 1071, Road No 44, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad,

500033 And Site Office At village Banjare, Tahsil Kurud, Revenue And Civil

District Dhamtari, (C.G.) Through its authorised signatory Mr. P. Krishna

Rao Aged About 46 Years, S/o Shri P. Sanyasi Rao.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Energy,

Mantralaya, Mahandi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2.State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Industries,

Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh

3.Superintending Engineer And Chief Electrical Inspector Government of

Chhattisgarh B. Block, Second Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur,

Chhattisgarh

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd. Through Its Chief

Executive Director (Commercial) 4th Floor Vidyut Sev Bhawan, Dangania,

Raipur Chhttisgarh

5.Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency C.R.E.D.A.,

Through Managing Director, 2nd Floor, CSERC Building, Shanti Nagar,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh

6.Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory, Commission, Through Its

Secretary, Having Its Registered Office At Civil Lines, G.E. Road, Raipur

Chhattisgarh

---- Respondents

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

4

WPC No. 1716 of 2016

M/s Ecofren Power And Projects Private Limited A Private Limited Company

Having Its Registered Office At Plot No 1071, Road No 44, Jubilee Hills,

Hyderabad, 500033 And Site Office At Chandkhuri Tehsil Revenue And Civil

District Durg Chhattisgarh Through Manager H.R. And IR and authorised

signatory Mr. P. Krishna Rao Aged About 46 Years, S/o Shri P. Sanyasi Rao

---- Petitioner

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Energy,

Mantralaya, Mahandi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh

2.State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Industries,

Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh

3.Superintending Engineer And Chief Electrical Inspector Government of

Chhattisgarh B. Block, Second Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur,

Chhattisgarh

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd. Through Its Chief

Executive Director (Commercial) 4th Floor Vidyut Sev Bhawan, Dangania,

Raipur Chhattisgarh

5.Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency C.R.E.D.A.,

Through Managing Director, 2nd Floor, C.S.E.R.C. Building, Shanti Nagar,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh

6.Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory, Commission, Through Its

Secretary, Having Its Registered Office At Civil Lines, G.E. Road, Raipur

Chhattisgarh

7.Executive Engineer, E.S. And Divisional Electrical Inspector Government

of Chhattisgarh Rajnandgaon Division Office At Sahdev Nagar, Bhadauria

Chowk G.E. Road, Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

---- Respondents

WPC No. 1743 of 2016

1.Neeraj Power Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Director Sunil Kumar Agrawal, 58,

Gandhi Chowk, Post Neora, District Raipur, P.S. Tilda Neora,

Chhattisgarh

2.Sunil Kumar Agrawal, S/o Shri Prem Chand Agrawal, Aged About 37

Years Director And Shareholder of Neeraj Power Pvt. Limited, R/o H- 20,

Anupam Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

---- Petitioners

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2.State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Secretary, Department of Industries,

Naya Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan,

Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Through Its

Executive Director (Commercial) 4th Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan,

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

5

Dangania, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

5.Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency CREDA,

Through Its Managing Director, 2nd Floor, CSERC Building, Shanti Nagar,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh

6.The Appellate Officer And Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

7.Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Through Its

Secretary, Having Its Regd. Office At Civil Lines, G.E. Road, Raipur,

Chhattisgarh 492001

---- Respondents

WPC No. 1745 of 2016

1.Real Power Pvt. Limited, Formerly NRI Power Pvt. Limited Through Its

Director, Vrindawan, Civil Lines, Raipur, P. S. Civil Lines, District Raipur,

Chhattisgarh

2.Shri Shesh Narayan Agrawal, S/o Shri Mohan Lal Agrawal, Aged About 34

Years, Director And Shareholder of Real Power Pvt. Limited, R/o Anita

Book Depo Kaiyastha Para, Purani Basti, Raipur, District Raipur,

Chhattisgarh

---- Petitioners

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2.State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Secretary, Department of Industries,

Naya Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan,

Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Through Its

Executive Director (Commercial) 4th Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan,

Dangania, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

5.Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency CREDA,

Through Its Managing Director, 2nd Floor, CSERC Building, Shanti Nagar,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

6.The Appellate Officer And Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

7.Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Through Its

Secretary, Having Its Regd. Office At Civil Lines, G.E. Road, Raipur,

Chhattisgarh 492001

---- Respondents

WPC No. 1773 of 2016

1.Rukmani Power And Steel Limited Through Its Director, Agrawal Gudakhu

Factory Campus, Ganesh Nagar, Bilaspur, P.S. Tarbahar, District Bilaspur,

Chhattisgarh.

2.Bajrang Lal Agrawal, S/o Late Lakhi Ram Agrawal, Aged About 45 Years

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

6

Director And Shareholder of Rukmani Power And Steel Limited, R/o

Ganesh Nagar, Bilaspur, P. S. Tarbahar, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

---- Petitioners

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2.State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Secretary, Department of Industries,

Naya Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan,

Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Through Its

Executive Director (Commercial) 4th Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan,

Dangania, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

5.Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency CREDA,

Through Its Managing Director, 2nd Floor, CSERC Building, Shanti Nagar,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh

6.The Appellate Officer And Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

7.Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Through Its

Secretary, Having Its Regd. Office At Civil Lines, G. E. Road, Raipur,

Chhattisgarh 492001

---- Respondents

WPC No. 1775 of 2016

1.Balaji Power A Unit of Hira Ferro Alloys Limited Through Its Director, Plot

No. 567- B, 568, Urla Industrial Complex, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2.Shri Y. C. Rao, S/o Late Y. Mandali, Aged About 49 Years Director And

Shareholder of Balaji Power, R/o Green Orchid, Mowa, Raipur

Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2.State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Secretary, Department of Industries,

Naya Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan,

Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Through Its

Executive Director (Commercial) 4th Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan,

Dangania, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

5.Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency CREDA,

Through Its Managing Director, 2nd Floor, CSERC Building, Shanti Nagar,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

6.The Appellate Officer And Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

7

7.Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Through Its

Secretary, Having Its Regd. Office At Civil Lines, G. E. Road, Raipur,

Chhattisgarh 492001

---- Respondents

WPC No. 1776 of 2016

1.Agrawal Viduyt, A Division of Agrawal Oil Extraction Limited, Through Its

Director, Kharora Road, Village Tusli, Post Neora, District Raipur, P.S.

Tilda Neora, Chhattisgarh

2.Amit Agrawal, S/o Shri Om Prakash Agrawal, Aged About 39 Years

Director And Shareholder of Agrawal Vidyut, R/o J. B. Bhawan, Gandhi

Chowk, Post Neora, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

---- Petitioners

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2.State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Secretary, Department of Industries,

Naya Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan,

Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Through Its

Executive Director (Commercial) 4th Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan,

Dangania, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

5.Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency CREDA,

Through Its Managing Director, 2nd Floor, CSERC Building, Shanti Nagar,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

6.The Appellate Officer And Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

7.Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Through Its

Secretary, Having Its Regd. Office At Civil Lines, G.E. Road, Raipur,

Chhattisgarh 492001

---- Respondents

WPC No. 1829 of 2016

1.M/s Shri Shyam Ware Housing And Power Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Director

Village Banari Naila District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

2.Ramesh Kumar Agrawal S/o Late Hariram Agrawal, Aged About 53 Years

Director of Shri Shyam Ware Housing And Power Pvt. Ltd. Village Banari

Naila, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh

---- Petitioners

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh

2.State of Chhattisgarh. Through Its Secretary, Department of Industries,

Naya Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh

3.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh Indrawati Bhawan,

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

8

Naya Raipur Raipur Chhattisgarh

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Through Its

Executive Director (Commercial) 4th Floor Vidyut Sev Bhawan, Dangania,

Raipur Chhattisgarh

5.Chhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Development Agency Creda

Through Its Managing Director, 2nd Floor, CSERC Building, Shanti Nagar,

Raipur Chhattisgarh,

6.The Appellate Officer And Secretary, Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh

7.Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Through Its

Secretary, Having Its Regd. Office At Civil Lines, G.E. Road, Raipur,

Chhattisgarh 492001

---- Respondents

WPC No. 2632 of 2016

M/s K.V.K. Bio Energy Private Limited A Company Duly Incorporated Under

The Provisions of The Companies Act 1956, Having Its Registered Office At

6-3-110/A-1 3rd Floor, Navbharat Chambers, Raj Bhawan Road,

Somajiguda, Hyderabad, Telengana And Having Its Plant At N.H. 49, Village

Amartal, Post Tilai, Distirct Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh, Through Its

Authorized Signatory Shri Sai Ram Tata.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Department of Energy, Naya

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh

2.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Industries,

Naya Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh

3.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh Indrawati Bhawan,

Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh

4.Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Through Its

Executive Director (Commercial) 4th Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan,

Dangania, Raipur Chhattisgarh

---- Respondents

WPC No. 3685 of 2021

M/s Jagdamba Power And Alloy Limited A Company Duly Incorporated

Under The Provisions of The Companies Act, 1956, Through Its Director Shri

Arun Poddar, S/o Late Shri Hariram Poddar, Aged About 52 Years, Having Its

Registered Office At G-16, Hira Arcade, Pandri, Raipur, P.S. Civil Lines,

Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

---- Petitioner

Versus

1.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Energy,

Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2.The Chief Electrical Inspector, State of Chhattisgarh, B Block, 2nd Floor,

Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

9

3.The Director, Directorate of Industry, Udyog Bhavan, Ring Road, Amlidih,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4.State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Industries,

Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

---- Respondents

(Cause Title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioners :Mr. Amit S. Agrawal, senior counsel, Mr.

V.V.S.Moorthy, senior counsel, assisted by

Mr. Shantanu Kumar, Mr. Ankit Singhal,

Mr. Akhil Kumar Samantray, Mr. Abhijeet

Mishra

For Respondent - State of

Chhattisgarh

:Mr. Satish Chandra Verma, Advocate

General, assisted by Mr. Vikram Sharma

and Mr. Gagan Tiwari, Deputy

Government Advocates.

For Respondent – Chhattisgarh

State Renewable Energy

Development Agency

:Mr. Devershi Thakur and Mr. Anway

Tiwari, Advocates.

For Respondent - Chhattisgarh

State Electricity Regulatory

Commission

Mr. Anumeh Shrivastava, Advocate.

For Respondent-CSPDCL :Mr. Apurv Goyal

Dates of Hearing :12.09.2022, 14.09.02022 and 15.09.2022

Date of Judgment :03.11.2022

Hon'ble Mr. Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

Hon'ble Mr. Deepak Kumar Tiwari, Judge

C A V Judgment

Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

In this batch of petitions, essentially, the notification dated

12.11.2014 issued under Section 3-B of the Chhattisgarh Electricity Duty

Act, 1949 (for short, the Act) is challenged and therefore, as submitted by

learned counsel for the parties, the writ petitions which have been listed

together, have been heard analogously and are being disposed of by this

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

10

common order.

2.Mr. Amit S. Agrawal, learned senior counsel, appearing for the

petitioner in WPC No. 1621/2016 has made the lead argument. Mr.

V.V.S.Moorthy, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. Shantanu Kumar,

as well as Mr. Ankit Singhal, Mr. Akhil Kumar Samantray, Mr. Abhijeet

Mishra, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioners have endorsed the

submissions of Mr. Agrawal and they submit that for the purpose of

disposal of the writ petition, reference may be made to the pleadings in

WPC No. 1621/2016.

3.WPC No. 1621/2016 is filed by Chhattisgarh Biomass Energy

Developers Association, through its Secretary, as petitioner No. 1, and

Sudha Bio Power Pvt. Ltd. (formerly Sudha Agro Oil & Chemical Industries

Ltd.), Neeraj Power Pvt. Ltd., Real Power Pvt. Ltd., Rukmani Power &

Steel Ltd, Balaji Power Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Shivalik Power & Steel

Pvt. Ltd) and Agrawal Vidyut, as petitioners No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7.

However, by an order dated 28.06.2016, the writ petition was treated to be

filed only by Sudha Bio Power Pvt. Ltd. and the other five writ petitioners

were directed to file separate and independent writ petitions.

4.Accordingly, Neeraj Power Pvt. Ltd., Real Power Pvt. Ltd., Rukmani

Power & Steel Ltd., Balaji Power Pvt. Ltd. And Agrawal Vidyut had also

filed independent writ petitions being WPC No. 1743/2016, 1745/2016,

1773/2016, 1775/2016 and 1776/2016, respectively.

5.Petitioner No. 1 is a registered association of which the petitioners

No. 2 to 7 are its members. The petitioners No. 2 to 7 are engaged in

business of generating power from bio-mass based power plants and have

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

11

their plants at different places in the State of Chhattisgarh.

6.The case of the petitioners, as presented in the writ petition, is that

the State Government of Chhattisgarh had formulated and notified its first

industrial policy 2001-2006 by notification dated 03.12.2001, published in

the State Gazette dated 25.01.2002. Under the said Industrial Policy, total

exemption was granted to all new industries set up in the State, from

payment of electricity duty under the provisions of the Act, for a period of

15 years from the date of commencement of commercial production.

Subsequently, the State Government of Chhattisgarh framed industrial

policy 2004-2009. Apart from others, the industrial policy provides for total

exemption from payment of electricity duty.

7. It is stated that in view of the representation being made in

Industrial Policy 2004-2009 of the State, the members of the petitioner

association altered their position by acting on the said representation and

promise and made huge investment to set up and establish industries in

different places in the State of Chhattisgarh to generate power from non

conventional sources and started their production from 2006-2008. It is

also pleaded that notification dated 03.11.2005, 05.04.2006 and

09.07.2008 were issued to effectuate the commitment made in the

Industrial Policy.

8.However, the Chief Electrical Inspector (respondent No. 3) started

issuing demand notices to the members of the petitioner association for

payment of electricity duty on the electrical units sold by the petitioners to

the Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited (for short, the

CSPDCL) on the ground that the companies are entitled to exemption from

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

12

payment of electricity duty only on the electricity duty which is used for self

consumption and not on sale to the Electricity Board. Some members of

the petitioner association had preferred writ petitions and this Court had

directed the State Government and the Chief Electrical Inspector to decide

the claim of the petitioners for exemption from payment of electricity duty in

accordance with law and providing that until the claim of the petitioners is

decided, no coercive steps shall be taken to recover the electricity duty

under demand notice. It is stated that though representations were filed

before the Chief Electrical Inspector, the same are still pending

consideration.

9.it is pleaded that by the impugned notification dated 12.11.2014, the

respondent No.1, in exercise of its power conferred by Section 3-B of the

Act and in supersession of the earlier notifications with respect to

exemption from payment of electricity duty under the Industrial Policy

2004-2009, exempted the eligible new industries (except expansion

projects of existing industrial units) of various categories, from the date of

commercial production, from payment of electricity duty payable only on

the electrical units consumed for its own use for the specified period

indicated therein thereby illegally withdrawing the benefit that had vested in

favour of the petitioner and had continued to subsist by virtue of the

Industrial Policy and the notifications issued thereunder and thus, the

notification is violative of the doctrines of legitimate expectation and

promissory estoppel.

10.The petitioners had approached this Court earlier by filing WPC No.

363/2015 challenging the validity of the notification dated 12.11.2014 and

this Court, by an order dated 02.03.2015, disposed of the said writ petition

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

13

directing the writ petitioners to submit a representation. Pursuant thereto,

the petitioners submitted a representation dated 18.03.2015 followed by a

written submission on 08.12.2015. The representation was rejected by the

Secretary, Department of energy by order dated 30.04.2016 and it is in that

circumstance, the present writ petition came to be field.

11.It is submitted by Mr. Amit S. Agrawal, learned senior counsel, that

the petitioners in WPC No. 1621/2016, 1864/2016, 1677/2015, 1743/2016,

1745/2016, 1773/2016, 1775/2016, 1776/2016, 1829/2016, 2632/2016,

1715/2016, 1716/2016 and 448/2021 have been categorized as Special

Thrust Sector Industry and petitioner in WPC No. 3685/2021, as General

Industry and that they are in operation. They had commenced commercial

production w.e.f 01.08.2006, 19.09.2009, 13.01.2007, 01.11.2006,

26.12.2006, 12.12.2006, 23.12.2006, 17.08.2006, 27.03.2012, 18.01.2006,

27.09.2006, 13.09.2006 and 06.09.2007, respectively. Petitioner in WPC

No. 3685/2021 had commenced production on 26.03.2007. However, the

industrial units in WPC No. 1715/2016, 1716/2016 and 448/2021 had

closed down w.e.f. 10.04.2015, 13.04.2015 and March, 2015, respectively.

12.Mr. Agrawal submits that the representation made by the State in its

industrial policy for grant of exemption from payment of electricity duty is a

solemn commitment and as the petitioners had acted upon such

representation and altered their position, the impugned notification dated

12.11.2014 is violative of the doctrines of legitimate expectation and

promissory estoppel. Exemption from payment of electricity duty flowing

from Industrial Policy of 2004-2009 was given effect to by statutory

notifications on 03.11.2005, 05.04.2006, 09.07.2008 and 30.09.2013, all

effective from 01.11.2004, and therefore, exemption, at any rate, could not

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

14

have been withdrawn with retrospective effect from 01.11.2004 by the

impugned notification dated 12.11.2014.

13.It is further submitted that the impugned notification withdrawing

vested right of exemption from payment of electricity duty retrospectively is

ultra vires Section 3-B(b) of the Act as the statute does not authorize

withdrawal of exemption benefit with retrospective effect. It is also

submitted that the said notification is manifestly arbitrary. He has

contended that the impugned notification cannot be construed as a

clarificatory notification as is sought to be contended in the return of the

State so as to apply the notification retrospectively. It is submitted by him

that it is not a case that the notification is issued in public interest as the

impugned notification did not recite that the notification was issued in public

interest and as such, State cannot seek to improve its case. He has drawn

attention of the Court to paragraph 14 of the return of the State in this

connection to demonstrate that only because of the perception that the

petitioners are making profit, the impugned notification was issued with

retrospective effect. Mr. Agrawal has relied on the decisions of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in Video Electronics (P) Ltd. v. State of Punjab, reported

in (1990) 3 SCC 87, Sable Waghire & Co. v. Union of India, reported in

(1975) 1 SCC 763, Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) v. Union of

India, reported in (1985) 1 SCC 641, Shayara Bano v. Union of India,

reported in (2017) 9 SCC 1, State of Jharkhand v. Brahmputra Metallics

Ltd. reported in (2020) SCC OnLine SC 968, Mahabir Vegetable Oils (P)

Ltd. v. State of Haryana, reported in (2006) 3 SCC 620, SVA Steel Re-

Rolling Mills Ltd. v. State of Kerala, reported in (2014) 4 SCC 186,

Director General of Foreign Trade v. M/s. Kanak Exports, reported in

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

15

(2016) 2 SCC 226, MRF Ltd. v. CST, reported in (2006) 8 SCC 702,

Pawan Alloys & Castings (P) Ltd. v. U.B. SEB, reported in (1997) 7 SCC

251 and State of U.P. v. Birla Corporation Ltd., reported in (2020) 20

SCC 320.

14.Abiding by the stand taken in the return and the additional return

filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3 and 6, Mr. Verma submits that the

order dated 30.04.2016 passed by the Secretary, Government of

Chhattisgarh, Department of Energy, is a reasoned order, who opined that

the impugned notification was issued in public interest and that the

exemption is only available to such industries who are in actual need owing

to their special circumstances and that the exemption from payment of

electricity duty is available to such industries who utilized the electricity

produced by them for their own use, without making any commercial usage

of the electricity produced by the Captive Power Plants. It is submitted that

it was realized that the industrial units were making profits out of the

exemptions granted to them. The rational of granting any exemption is to

strengthen an industry in its nascent stage to enable it to survive initial

days of hardship by providing necessary financial support to the industry to

sustain itself till it reaches the stage when it can survive on its own profits.

When the petitioners have started earning profit, there is no justification to

continue to grant exemption. It is stated that grant and withdrawal of

exemption is a policy matter and Section 3(B)(b) of the Act enables levy of

electricity duty upon cancellation of exemption and therefore, invocation of

principles of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation, is

misconceived. A conjoint reading of Section 3-B of the Act and Section 21

of the Chhattisgarh General Clauses Act, 1957 (for short, Act of 1957)

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

16

would demonstrate that power to add, amend, vary or rescind an order is

inherent in every enactment and therefore, the notification dated

12.11.2014 cannot be said to be illegal or vitiated. It was concluded by the

Government that the policy decision of granting of exemption was not in

public interest, and therefore, to correct the mistake in the earlier

notifications, the impugned notification was issued. Relying on the

additional return filed on behalf of the respondents No. 1 to 3 and 6, it is

submitted by him that the impugned notification is a clarificatory notification

and therefore, it has retrospective effect. The notification dated 12.11.2014

cannot be construed to be a notification withdrawing the exemption/

concession already granted with respect to selling of electricity. It is

submitted by Mr. Verma that it cannot be argued that the policy had been

withdrawn as exemption is still being granted for auxillary consumption. It is

submitted by Mr. Verma that if literal construction of the word ‘total

exemption’ used in the exemption notification is resorted to as pleaded by

the petitioners, it would lead to an absurd situation as non-electricity

producing new industrial units would avail benefit of electricity duty

exemption only at the time of self-consumption/use, whereas electricity

producing units would avail benefit of the electricity duty exemption not

only at the time of self consumption/use but also at the time of selling the

electricity, which is not the intention of the policy.

15.Mr. Verma further submits that the petitioners are covered both

under the definition of ‘consumer’ under Section 2(a) and ‘producer’ under

Section 2(d)(i) of the Act. Mr. Verma relies on the decisions of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in Union of India & Another v. VVF Limited & Another,

reported in (2020) 20 SCC 57, State of Gujarat v. Arcelor Mittal Nippon

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

17

Steel Limited, reported in (2022) 6 SCC 459, Commissioner of Customs

(Import), Mumbai v. Dilip Kumar & Company and Others, reported in

(2018) 9 SCC 1 as well as in Pepsico India Holdings Private Limited v.

State of Kerala & Others, reported in (2009) 13 SCC 55.

16.We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the

parties and have perused the materials on record.

17. Industrial Policy 2004-2009 was unveiled with an object to promote

private sector participation, for creation of industrial infrastructure, to create

additional employment opportunities by accelerating the process of

industrialisation in the State, to create enabling environment for ensuring

maximum value addition to the abundant, locally available mineral and

forest based resources, to promote private sector participation for creation

of industrial infrastructure in the State and to increase industrial production.

18.The policy classified industries into three categories, namely,

negative list industries, special thrust industries and general industries. The

industries for power generation from non-conventional sources were

classified as a special thrust industries. Sub-clause (ii) of Clause 4.4.5 of

the Industrial Policy provides that industries would be entitled to additional

directed incentives. Clause B of point 3 of the Industrial Policy provides

total exemption for a period of 15 years for special thrust industries from

the date of commencement of commercial production for medium large

industries. Relevant portions of Industrial Policy are extracted herein

below:

“4.4.6. Directed incentives provided in this policy will be available

to the following industrial undertakings:

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

18

(i) New Industrial projects – All such industrial units, which

commence commercial production between 1

st

November 2004 to

31

st

October, 2009.

4.4.7. Investors belonging to different categories setting small

scale, medium-large and mega industrial projects in different

areas of the State will be entitled to directed incentives given in

Annexure-4.

4.4.12The investors, who had taken effective steps for setting

up their industrial units prior to 1

st

November 2004, but commercial

production had not commenced up to the appointed day, will have

the option to avail of the benefit of the package of exemptions/

concessions provided for in the Industrial Policy 2001-2006.

19.Point 3 of Annexure A-4 provides Electricity Duty exemption only to the

new industries. The petitioners come under Medium-Large industry. Point 3

reads as follows:

“3. Electricity Duty Exemption

Exemption from payment of electricity duty will be given only to the

new industries as per the details given below. Expansion projects

of the existing industrial units will not be eligible for exemption

from electricity duty.

A. Small Industry

Region General Industry Special Thrust

Industry

Category A –

General Area

1. Total exemption for a

period of 10 years from

the date of

Total exemption for

a period of 15 years

from the date of

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

19

commencement of

commercial production.

2. Exemption for 15

years to the industrial

set-up by the scheduled

caste/ tribe category.

commencement of

commercial

production.

Category B- Most

Backward

Scheduled Tribe

dominant areas

Total exemption for a

period of 15 years from

the date of

commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption for

a period of 15 years

from the date of

commercial

production.

B. Medium – Large Industry

Region General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category A –

General area

Total exemption for a

period of 10 years

from the date of

commencement of

commercial

production.

Total exemption for a

period of 15 years from

the date of

commencement of

commercial production.

Category B –

Most backward

scheduled tribe

dominant areas

Total exemption for a

period of 15 years

from the date of

commencement of

commercial

production.

Total exemption for a

period of 15 years from

the date of

commencement of

commercial production.

C. Mega Project

Region General Industry Special Thrust

Industry

Category A –

General Area

Total exemption for a

period of 15 years from the

date of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption for a

period of 15 years

from the date of

commencement of

commercial

production.

Category B-

Most Backward

Scheduled Tribe

dominant areas

Total exemption for a

period of 15 years from the

date of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption for a

period of 15 years

from the date of

commercial

production.

20.In terms of the policy, a notification dated 03.11.2005 was issued by

the Department of Energy, State of Chhattisgarh providing total exemption

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

20

from payment of electricity duty for a period of 15 years from the start of

commercial production in respect of new industrial units. The relevant

portion of the notification dated 03.11.2005 issued by the Government of

Chhattisgarh, Energy Department, reads as follows:

“Government of Chhattisgarh, Energy Department

Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur,

Notification

Raipur, dated 03.11.2005

No. 3000/13/Ati/Adhisuchna/05: Because under the provisions of

Industrial Policy 2004-2009 the State Government is of the opinion

that it is necessary and justified to promote new industrial units in

the State.

Therefore, in exercise of powers conferred under the

provisions of Section 3(b) of Chhattisgarh Electricity Duty Act,

1949 (Act of 1949), the State Government has been pleased to

grant exemption in the payment of Electricity Duty for the specified

period from the date of starting of commercial production only to

the new industries to be established in the State as shown in the

below mentioned table:

A. SMALL INDUSTRY

Area General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category A –

General Area

1. Total exemption upto 10

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

2. Total exemption up to

Total exemption upto 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

21

15 years for the

industries established by

the Scheduled Caste/

Scheduled Tribe category.

Category – B

Most backward

Scheduled Tribe

Dominant Areas

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption upto 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

B. MEDIUM-LARGE INDUSTRY

Area General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category A –

General Area

Total exemption upto 10

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption upto 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Category – B

Most backward

Scheduled Tribe

Dominant Areas

Total exemption upto 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption upto 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

The units having expansion schemes in the existing Industrial

Units shall not be eligible for any exemption/concessions/

relaxation in making payment of Electricity Duty.

…….

This notification shall be deemed to have come into effect from

01.11.2004.

By order and in the name of the

Governor of Chhattisgarh

Sd/-

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

22

Illegible

(P.K.Mishra)

Joint Secretary,

Government of Chhattisgarh,

Energy Department, Raipur”

21.Another notification dated 05.04.2006 was issued by the

Department of Energy, State of Chhattisgarh, under the Industrial Policy

2004-2009 for new industrial units which commenced production on or

after 01.11.2004, wherein also total exemption from payment of electricity

duty to special thrust industries and general industries from the date of

start of commercial production was provided. In the said notification, it was

laid down that the industries could take the benefit of notifications dated

21.06.2002, 25.06.2002 and 18.08.2003 under the Industrial Policy 2001-

2006 or could take the benefit of notifications under the Industrial Policy

2004-2009, provided the commercial production commenced after

01.11.2004. The relevant part of notification dated 05.04.2006 reads as

under:

“Government of Chhattisgarh

Energy Department

Mantralaya, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur,

Raipur, dated 5

th

April, 2006

No. F-11-4-2006-13-1: Because under the provisions of Industrial

Policy 2004-2009 the State Government is of the opinion that it is

necessary and justified to promote new industrial units in the

State.

Therefore, in exercise of powers conferred under the

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

23

provisions of Section 3(c) of Chhattisgarh Electricity Duty Act,

1949 (Act of 1949), the State Government has been pleased to

grant exemption in the payment of Electricity Duty for the specific

period from the date of starting of commercial production only to

new industries to be established in the State except the industries

shown in the list in below mentioned tables:

A. SMALL INDUSTRY

Area

General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category Sub –

General Area

1. Total exemption upto

10 years from the date of

commencement of

commercial production.

2. Total exemption upto

15 years for the

industries established by

the Scheduled Caste/

Scheduled Tribe

category.

Total exemption upto 15

years from the date of

commencement of

commercial production.

Category – B

Most backward

Scheduled Tribe

Dominant Areas

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

B. MEDIUM-LARGE INDUSTRY

Area

General IndustrySpecial Thrust Industry

Category A –

General Area

Total exemption up to 10

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Category – B Total exemption up to 15 Total exemption up to

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

24

Most backward

Scheduled Tribe

Dominant Areas

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

C. MEGA PROJECTS – VERY LARGE INDUSTRY

Area General IndustrySpecial Thrust Industry

Category A-

General Area

Total exemption up to 10

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to

15 years from the

date of commercial

production.

Most backward

Scheduled Tribe

Dominant Areas

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to

15 years from the

date of commercial

production.

The expansion schemes of existing Industrial Units shall not

be eligible for any exemption in Electricity Duty.

…...

This notification shall be deemed to have come into effect from

01.11.2001. This notification is being issued replacing the

Notification No. 300713/Ashi/Adhisuchna/2003, dated 3

rd

November, 2005 which will remain effective in place of the said

Notification.

By order and in the name of the

Governor of Chhattisgarh

Sd/-

Illegible

(B.K.Mishra)

Joint Secretary”

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

25

22.Another notification was issued on 09.07.2008 pursuant to the said

industrial policy and in exercise of power under Section 3(B) of the of the

Act, whereby the State Government granted total exemption from payment

of electricity duty from the date of commencement of commercial

production for a period of 15 years giving retrospective effect from

01.11.2004. The notification reads as under:

“Energy Department

Mantralaya, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur,

Raipur, Dated 9

th

July 2008

No. 1416/13/2/E.D./Notification/08:- Since under the provisions of

Industrial Policy 2004-2009 the State Government is of the opinion that it

is necessary and justified to promote new industrial units in the State.

Therefore, in accordance to earlier Notification No. 3000/13/U.V./

Adhisuchna dated 03.11.2005, in exercise of powers conferred under the

provisions of Section 3(b) of the Chhattisgarh Electricity Duty Act, 1949

(Act 1949), the State Government has been pleased to grant the

exemption in the payment of Electricity Duty for the specified period from

the date of starting of commercial production only to the new industries to

be established in the State (except the units having schemes of

expansion of their existing units). The anomalies/deficiencies have been

found in the notification and the Industrial Policy 2004-2009 issued earlier,

therefore, for maintaining provisions of incentives of exemption in the

payment of Electricity Duty modification in Industrial Policy 2004-2009

and notification dated 03.11.2005 is necessary.

Therefore, by superseding the Notification No. 3000/13/U.V./

Adhisuchna/05, dated 03.11.2005 issued earlier, this notification is being

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

26

issued. Accordingly, the exemption in the payment of Electricity duty for

specific period is being granted to new units of various categories from

the date of starting their commercial production as shown in front of them

in the following tables:

A. SMALL INDUSTRY

Area

General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category A – General

Area

1. Total exemption up to

10 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

2. Total exemption up

to 15 years for the

industries established by

the Scheduled Caste/

Scheduled Tribe category.

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Category – B Most

backward Scheduled

Tribe Dominant Areas

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

B. MEDIUM-LARGE INDUSTRY

Area

General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category A – General

Area

Total exemption up to 10

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Category – B Most

backward Scheduled

Tribe Dominant Areas

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

27

C. MEGA PROJECTS – LARGE INDUSTRY

Area General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category A – General

Area

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Category – B Most

backward Scheduled

Tribe Dominant Areas

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

The units having expansion schemes in the existing industrial units

shall not be eligible for any exemption/concessions/relaxation in

Electricity Duty.

……..

This notification shall be effective retrospectively w.e.f. 01.11.2004.

By order and in the name of the

Governor of Chhattisgarh

Sd/-

Illegible

(S.L.Adile)

Under Secretary,

Government of Chhattisgarh,

Energy Department, Raipur”

23. It is also relevant to extract the notification dated 30.09.2013. The

same reads as under:

“Government of Chhattisgarh

Energy Department

Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur,

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

28

Notification

Raipur, dated 30.09.2013

No. F21/29/08/13/2/2013: The State Government is of the opinion

that some of the anomalies in the notification No. F-11-4-2008-13-1

dated 05.04.2008 have been found and superseding of notifications

issued earlier is not mentioned in the notification No.

1416/13/ED/Adhisuchna/08, dated 09.07.2008, and therefore, in

regard to granting benefit of relaxation / concession / exemption in

making payment of electricity duty there is position of

misunderstanding in regard to Industrial Policy 2004-2009, therefore,

for encouraging new industrial units by way of granting benefit of

relaxation / concession/ exemption in making payment of electricity

duty in the State under the provisions of industrial policy 2004-2009,

it is justified and necessary to issue this notification.

Therefore, in exercise of powers conferred under the provisions of

Section 3(b) of Chhattisgarh Electricity Duty Act, 1949 (Act 1949), for

avoiding the present misunderstanding, by superseding both the

aforesaid notifications alongwith all other notifications issued earlier,

the State government has been pleased to grant the exemption

/concession / relaxation in the payment of Electricity Duty for the

specific period from the date of starting of commercial production to

the eligible industries of various categories established in the State

(except the expansion schemes of existing units) as shown in the

below mentioned table:

A. SMALL INDUSTRY

Area General Industry Special Thrust Industry

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

29

Category A –

General Area

1. Up to 10 years

complete relaxation from

the date of starting

commercial production.

2. Up to 15 years

relaxation for the

industries established by

the Scheduled Caste/

Scheduled Tribe category.

Up to 15 years complete

relaxation from the date

of starting commercial

production.

Category – B

Most backward

Scheduled Tribe

Dominant Areas

Up to 15 years complete

relaxation from the date

of starting commercial

production.

Up to 15 years complete

relaxation from the date

of starting commercial

production.

B. MEDIUM-LARGE INDUSTRY

Area

General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category A –

General Area

Up to 10 years complete

relaxation from the date

of starting commercial

production.

Up to 15 years complete

relaxation from the date

of starting commercial

production.

Category – B

Most backward

Scheduled Tribe

Dominant Areas

Up to 15 years complete

relaxation from the date

of starting commercial

production.

Up to 15 years complete

relaxation from the date

of starting commercial

production.

C. MEGA PROJECTS – LARGE INDUSTRY

Area General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category A –

General Area

Up to 15 years complete

relaxation from the date

Up to 15 years complete

relaxation from the date

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

30

of starting commercial

production.

of starting commercial

production.

Category – B

Most backward

Scheduled

Tribe Dominant

Areas

Up to 15 years complete

relaxation from the date

of starting commercial

production.

Up to 15 years complete

relaxation from the date

of starting commercial

production.

Therefore, in accordance to above the exemption in making

payment of electricity duty shall be subject to the following terms

i.e.-

1. The only new industries / units completing provisions as

mentioned in para 4.4.6 of Industrial Policy 2004-2009 of the State

shall be eligible for the benefit of exemptions/ concessions/

relaxation in making payment of Electricity Duty.

2. The industries included in the list of ineligible List as mentioned in

Appendix 2 of Industrial Policy 2004-2009 of the State shall not be

eligible for the benefit of exemptions/concessions/relaxation in

making payment of Electricity Duty.

3. In accordance to Part 3 of Appendix 4 of Industrial Policy 2004-

2009 of State, the industries shall not be eligible for the benefit of

exemptions / concessions/ relaxation in making payment of

Electricity Duty for the expansion scheme of their Industry/Unit.

4. Those industries who under the provisions as mentioned in para

4.4.12 of Industrial Policy 2004-2009 might had taken prescribed

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

31

effective steps for establishing of industry established prior to

01.11.2004.

(1) The physical and legally possession of land for the industry

might have been taken over.

(2) The construction of shed/building might have been started

in accordance to project report, and

(3) Confirm purchase order for purchasing of plant and

machinery in accordance to project report might have been

issued, but the commercial production might have not been

started on prescribed date, they will be having options to avail

the benefit of packages of relaxation/concession/exemption as

provided in Industrial Policy 2001-2006 shall be available for

them.

5. Such industries/investors in whose case the certificate for getting

the benefit of relaxation/concession/exemptions in the payment of

Electricity Duty has been issued in accordance to Industrial Policy

2001-2006 by the Chief Electrical Inspector, will not be eligible for

getting the benefit of relaxation / concession / exemptions in the

payment of Electricity Duty under the provisions of Industrial Policy

2004-2009, however, in accordance to certified issued earlier the

benefit of relaxation/concession/exemptions in the payment of

Electricity Duty shown in the aforesaid certificate for the prescribed

period will remain as it is.

6. The eligibility for getting the benefits of exemption / concession /

relaxation in making payment of Electricity Duty subject to the

terms/provisions of Industrial Policy 2004-209 shall be determined

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

32

by the Industries Department, for which the applicant/industry has

to produce application mentioning therein that all the provisions

mentioned in the Industrial Policy 2004-2009 have been satisfied in

the office of Chief Electrical Inspector. Accordingly, after considering

application, the eligibility certificate for granting of benefit of

exemption / concession / relaxation in making payment of Electricity

Duty for the prescribed period as per provisions of Industrial Policy

shall be issued.

7. In accordance to provisions of Industrial Policy the industries /

investors for getting the benefit of relaxation / concession /

exemptions the industry/investor shall be responsible to satisfy the

provisions of providing employment to the people of local area, for

which the industry/investor has to produce the certificate issued by

the concerned District Collector necessarily.

8. In the event of being found violation of any of the terms as

defined in the Industrial Policy, the eligibility of relaxation/

concession/ exemptions in the payment of electricity duty of such

industry / investor shall be cancelled automatically and the amount

availed towards relaxation / concession/ exemptions by the

industry/investor shall be recovered as per prevailing land revenue

recovery provisions.

9. The decision of Energy Department in regard to eligibility of

relaxation / concession / exemptions in the payment of Electricity

Duty shall be final.

The provisions of this notification shall be effective w.e.f 01.11.2004.

By order and in the name of Governor

of Chhattisgarh

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

33

Sd/- Illegible

(V. Anand Babu)

Special Secretary,

Government of Chhattisgarh,

Energy Department, Raipur”

24.It is also relevant to extract the impugned notification dated

12.11.2014. The same reads as under:

“Government of Chhattisgarh

Energy Department

Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur

NOTIFICATION

Raipur, dated 12.11.2014

No. 2361/F-21/29/2008/13/2: Whereas, the State Government is

of the opinion that there are discrepancies in this department’s

earlier notification number F-11-4-2006-13-1, dated 05.04.2006,

supersession of the said earlier notification was not mentioned in

the notification number 1416/13/ED/Notification/08, dated

09.07.2008 and notification number F21/29/08/13/2/201, dated

30.09.2013 issued in super session of the above two notifications

is also ambiguous and hence there is confusion with regard to

application of Electricity Duty Exemption as provided in Industrial

Policy 2004-2009 and it is necessary and expedient to supersede

earlier notification for the purpose of encouraging new industrial

units and to provide specified incentives for exemption in the

electricity duty in the State under Industrial Policy 2004-2009;

Now therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3-B

of the Chhattisgarh Electricity Duty Act, 1949 (No. X of 1949) and

in super session of this department earlier notifications with

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

34

respect to exemption from payment of electricity duty under

Industrial Policy 2004-2009 and for the purpose of clarifying the

status of confusion in the provisions, the State Government,

hereby, exempts eligible new industries (except expansion

projects of existing industrial units) of various categories as

specified in the table mentioned below, from the date of

commencement of commercial production, from payment of

electricity duty payable only on the electrical units consumed for

its own use for the period indicated against them, namely:-

(emphasis supplied)

(A) Small Industry

Region General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category A

General Area

1. Total exemption up to

10 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

2. Total exemption up to

15 years to the industries

set-up by the Scheduled

Castes/Tribes cadre.

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Category B –

Most Backward

Scheduled

Tribes Dominant

Areas

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

35

(B) Medium Large Industry

Region General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category A

General Area

Total exemption up to

10 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Category B –

Most Backward

Scheduled

Tribes Dominant

Areas

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

(C) Mega Project

Region General Industry Special Thrust Industry

Category A

General Area

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Category B –

Most Backward

Scheduled

Tribes Dominant

Areas

Total exemption up to

15 years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

Total exemption up to 15

years from the date

of commencement of

commercial production.

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

36

Above exemption from Electricity Duty shall be given under

the following conditions, namely:-

(1) Only those new industrial projects, who are complying with the

conditions stipulated in clause 4.4.6 of the Industrial Policy, 2004-

2009 of the State shall be entitled for exemption from payment of

Electricity Duty.

(2) Ineligible Industries (Negative list) included in Annexure-2 of

the Industrial Policy, 2004-2009 of the State, which is as per

enclosed Annexure-A, shall not be eligible for exemption from

payment of Electricity Duty.

(3) Expansion projects of existing industrial units shall not be

eligible for exemption from payment of Electricity Duty as

mentioned in Part-3 of Annexure-4 of the Industrial Policy, 2004-

2009 of the State.

(4) Those industries who have undertaken “effective steps” prior

to 01.11.04 under Clause 4.4.12 of the Industrial Policy, 2004-

2009 of the State, for establishment of industries i.e. -

(i) Unit has taken valid possession of land,

(ii) Unit has commenced construction of shed as per DPR, and

(iii) Unit has placed final purchase order for plant and machinery

as per Project Report but if the commercial production has not

commenced on the appointed day, then the units shall have the

option to avail concession/exemption provided in Industrial Policy

2001-2006.

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

37

(5) Such industry(ies)/investor(s), who have issued certificate by

the Chief Electrical Inspector for exemption from payment of

Electricity Duty as per Industrial Policy 2001-06 or as per the

previous notifications issued by the Energy Department, shall not

be eligible for exemption from payment of Electricity Duty under

Industrial Policy, 2004-2009 of the State as per this notification.

However, facility of exemption from payment of Electricity Duty as

per certificate issued earlier, shall remain as it is for the period

indicated in the said certificate.

(6) Department of Industries shall determine the eligibility of

exemption for industrial units, as per prescribed conditions of the

Industrial Policy, 2004-2009 of the State, for availing the facility of

exemption from payment of Electricity Duty. For this purpose

applicant industry has to submit an application in the office of

Chief Electrical Inspectorate alongwith certified certificate by the

Department of Industries in which it has been clearly stated that

industry is complying with all the provisions of the Industrial

Policy, 2004-2009 of the State. Thereafter, the Chief Electrical

Inspectorate shall after considering the Department of Industries’

recommended application, issue certificate for exemption from

payment of Electricity Duty for the period prescribed in the

Industrial Policy.

(7) It shall be the responsibility of the investor to comply the

provision relating to providing employment to the local resident in

the industrial unit as per the provisions of Industrial Policy and for

this purpose investor has to compulsorily produce certificate

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

38

issued by the Collector of concerned district.

(8) Eligibility of exemption shall end automatically on violation of

any of the conditions defined in the Industrial Policy and benefits

availed against the concession shall be recovered as arrears of

land revenue.

(9)Decision of Department of Energy regarding eligibility for

exemption from Electrical Duty shall be final.

This notification shall be deemed to have come into force with

retrospective effect from the date of 01.11.2004.

By order and in the name of the

Governor of Chhattisgarh

Sd/- Illegible

(B. Ananda Babu)

Secretary

Govt. of Chhattisgarh

Energy Department”

25.In Video Electronics (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court had

observed that a notification issued in accordance with the powers

conferred by the statute has a statutory force and validity and that the

power to grant exemption is quasi legislative. Therefore, it cannot be

disputed that issuance of exemption notification is exercise of legislative

power.

26.In Sable Waghire (supra), it was held that a notification issued under

provision of a statute is not an executive order but is a piece of

subordinate legislation. In Indian Express Newspapers (supra), it was

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

39

held that a piece of subordinate legislation does not carry the same degree

of immunity which is enjoyed by a statute passed by a competent

Legislature and that subordinate legislation may be questioned on any of

the grounds on which plenary legislation is questioned. In addition, it may

also be questioned on the ground that it does not conform to the statute

under which it is made or that it is contrary to some other statute as

subordinate legislation must yield to plenary legislation. It may also be

questioned on the ground that it is manifestly arbitrary.

27.In Shayara Bano (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the

decision in State of A.P. v. McDowell & Co., reported in (1996) 3 SCC

709, wherein it was observed that there is an absolute bar to the use of

“arbitrariness” as a tool to strike down legislation under Article 14, is not a

good law and it was held that a subordinate legislation can be struck down

on the ground that it is arbitrary and therefore, violative of Article 14 of the

Constitution of India. Manifest arbitrariness is something done by the

legislature capriciously, irrationally and/or without adequate determining

principle or when something is done which is excessive and

disproportionate.

28.In Brahmputra Metallics Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court

had given an expansive interpretation to the doctrine of promissory

estoppel in order to remedy the injustice being done to a party who has

relied on a promise.

29.In Mahabir Vegetable Oils (P) Ltd. (supra), it was held by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court that the doctrine of promissory estoppel operates

even in the legislative fields. It was also held that what is granted can be

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

40

withdrawn by the Government except in the case where the doctrine of

promissory estoppel applies and that promissory estopple operates on

equity and in public interest. It was also held that it is beyond any cavil that

a subordinate legislation can be given a retrospective effect and retroactive

operation, if any power in that behalf is contained in an Act. The rule

making power is a species of delegated legislation and therefore, a

delegatee therefore can make rules only within the four-corners thereof. It

was also observed that it is a fundamental rule of law that no statute shall

be construed to have a retrospective operation unless such a construction

appears very clearly in terms of the Act, or arises by necessary and distinct

implication.

30.In SVA Steel Re-Rolling Mills Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme

Court laid down as follows:

“30. Before laying down any policy which would give benefits to its

subjects, the State must think about pros and cons of the policy

and its capacity to give the benefits. Without proper appreciation of

all the relevant factors, the State should not give any assurance,

not only because that would be in violation of the principles of

promissory estoppel but it would be unfair and immoral on the part

of the State not to act as per its promise.

31. In the instant case, the respondent State was conscious about

the fact that there was a problem with regard to supply of electricity

in the State of Kerala and possibly for that reason industries which

depended much upon electricity as a source of power were not

inclined to establish new industries in the State of Kerala. Before

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

41

setting up an industry, the entrepreneur or the industrialist

considers several factors and thereupon takes several decisions

like place of business, capacity at which production should be

made, type of raw material, etc. After considering all these factors,

a final decision is taken with regard to setting up of an industry. For

a new entrepreneur, such a decision is of vital importance because

if he fails in his estimates or in consideration of all the relevant

factors, there are all chances that he would fail not only in his

business but he would completely ruin himself. Thus, one can very

well appreciate that the appellants must have thought about all

relevant factors, including the incentives offered by the respondent

State and might have decided to set up their industries in the

respondent State. While deciding this case, this Court would

invariably keep in mind the circumstances in which the appellants

had set up their industries in the State of Kerala.

32. In view of the incentives and assurances given to the

appellants along with others, who were desirous of setting up new

industries, the appellants set up their new units which were much

dependent upon continuous supply of electricity. One of the

appellants is a Steel Re-rolling Mill. In steel industry, when the

industry is concerned with making of steel or re-rolling of steel, it

requires lot of power and energy, and electricity being one of the

important sources of power, the appellant was much dependent on

continuous supply of electricity, which had been assured to it by the

respondent State.

33. If an assurance was given to the appellants and similarly

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

42

situated persons that they would be given 100% electricity supply

for five years, the respondent cannot wriggle out of their liability by

making a policy to the effect that the benefit by way of incentive

would be extended only if the electricity supply was reduced to less

than 50% on a particular day. A steel industry, for example, which

cannot function without electricity or power in any other form, would

be put to enormous inconvenience and loss if the power supply is

not continuous. So as to reactivate or to restart the machines or to

start the process afresh, the industry has to spend something more

than what it would have spent if the supply or power, namely,

electricity was uninterrupted. Stoppage of manufacturing process

would mean losses under several heads. The labour employed has

to be paid even when the employer does not get work from the

labour force. Very often, so as to bring a required temperature for

the purpose of carrying on certain processes, more fuel is to be

injected so as to attain the condition which was prevailing prior to

electricity supply being disconnected. Moreover, there would be

several overhead expenses which one has to incur even if there is

no production or stoppage of manufacturing process.”

31.The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in VVF Limited & Another (supra)

held that doctrine of promissory estoppel cannot be invoked in the abstract

and the Courts are bound to consider all aspects including the objective to

be achieved and public good at large. The doctrine cannot be pressed into

to compel the government or the public authority to carry out the

representation or promise which was contrary to law. The doctrine must

yield when the equity so demands if it can be shown having regard to the

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

43

facts and circumstances of the case that it would be inequitable to hold the

government or the competent authority to its promise, assurance or

representation. Even in a case where a party has acted on the promise, if

there is any supervening public interest which requires that the benefit be

withdrawn or the scheme be modified, that supervening public interest

would prevail over any promissory estoppel. It was also observed that a

clarificatory order can be given retrospective effect as it can throw light on

substantive provisions. It was further observed that the notification/

industrial policies impugned before the High Courts are clarificatory in

nature and it can be defined as an act to remove the doubts. It was further

held that it cannot be said that by the subsequent notifications/industrial

policies, the benefits which were accrued/granted under the earlier

notifications were sought to be taken away.

32.In Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel Limited (supra), the Hon’ble

Supreme Court held that the doctrine of promissory estoppel is an

equitable remedy and has to be moulded depending on the facts of each

case and not straitjacketed into pigeon-holes. This was illustrated by

observing that there cannot be any hard and fast rule for applying the

doctrine of promissory estoppel but the doctrine has to evolve and expand

itself so as to do justice between the parties and ensure equity between the

parties.

33. In Pepsico India Holdings Private Limited (supra), the Hon’ble

Supreme Court had taken note of the judgment in the case of U.P. Power

Corporation Ltd. and Another v. Sant Steels & Alloys (P) Ltd. and

Others, reported in (2008) 2 SCC 777, wherein it was laid down that in

order to keep the faith and maintain good governance, it is necessary that

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

44

whatever representation is made by the Government or its instrumentality

which induces the other party to act, the Government should not be

permitted to withdraw from that as the same is a matter of faith which is

very important in the 21

st

Century when there is a global economy.

34.In MRF Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that under

Section 10(1) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, the State

Government has the power to make an exemption or reduction in rate

either prospectively or retrospectively in respect of any tax payable under

that Act. The power of Government under Section 10(3) of the Act of 1963,

by notification in the Gazette to cancel or vary any notification issued

under Section 10(3) cannot be exercised retrospectively. It was further

held that the doctrine of promissory estoppels is applicable as against the

statutory notification.

35.In Birla Corporation Ltd., the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that

financial implications regarding future revenue loss cannot be invoked as

supervening public interest in reference to the activities of the industrial

units who qualify the conditions specified in notification dated 27.02.1998

in all other respects and had commenced commercial production before

the specified date. It was held that an enforceable right had accrued to and

crystalised in favour of such industrial units which could not be truncated

or snapped unless the dominant purpose for which the notification came to

be issued had ceased to exist. It was also observed that it can safely be

presumed that the policy makers were fully conscious about the so-called

loss of future revenue due to rebate granted to the units when they had

issued notification in question.

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

45

36.In M/s. Kanak Exports (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held

that the Government has a right to amend, modify or even rescind a

particular scheme and that in complex economic matters, every decision is

necessarily empiric and it is based on experimentation and therefore its

validity cannot be tested on any rigid prior considerations or on the

application of any straight-jacket formula. The Hon’ble Supreme Court,

however, held that a delegated or subordinate legislation can only be

prospective and not retrospective, unless rule making authority has been

vested with power under a statute to make rules with retrospective effect.

On consideration of the factual matrix of the case, the Hon’ble Supreme

Court came to the conclusion that the writ petitioner/exporter had not

actually achieved the targets set down in the original scheme and thereby

had not acquired any “vested right” and there was only blatant misuse of

the provisions of the scheme and therefore, the impugned decision did not

take any vested right of the exporters and amendments were necessitated

by over-whelming public interest/considerations to prevent the misuse of

the scheme. It was in the background of the above circumstances, the

Hon’ble Supreme Court held that even when the impugned Notification

issued under the provisions of the Act could not be retrospective in nature,

such retrospectivity had not deprived the writ petitioners/exporters of their

right inasmuch as no right had accrued in favour of such persons under the

scheme. The Hon’ble Supreme Court emphatically laid down that in

exercise of writ jurisdiction, the High Court cannot come to the aid of such

petitioners/exporters who, without making actual exports, play with the

provisions of the scheme and try to take undue advantage thereof.

37.In Pawan Alloys & Castings (P) Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

46

Court observed that when no public interest was sought to be pressed in

service by the Board for withdrawal of the incentive rebate, and the same

was solely on the ground of commercial interest of the Board which had

earlier held out a promise of incentive rebate, the equity which had arisen

in favour of the appellants remained untouched and undisturbed by any

overwhelming and superior equity in favour of the Board entitling it to

withdraw the incentive rebate in a premature manner leaving the

promisees high and dry.

38.In Dilip Kumar & Company and Others (supra), the Constitution

Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court had examined the correctness of the

decision rendered in the case of Sun Export Corporation, Bombay v.

Collector of Customs, Bombay, reported in (1997) 6 SCC 564, on a

reference being made. The question that had arisen for consideration was

as to what is the interpretative rule to be applied while interpreting a

tax exemption provision/notification when there is an ambiguity as to its

applicability with reference to the entitlement of the assessee or the rate of

tax to be applied? In that context, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had

answered the reference holding that an exemption notification should be

interpreted strictly, and the burden of proving applicability would be on the

assessee to show that his case comes within the parameters of the

exemption clause or exemption notification. When there is ambiguity in

exemption notification which is subject to strict interpretation, the benefit of

such ambiguity cannot be claimed by the subject/assessee and it must be

interpreted in favour of the revenue. Holding thus, the decision in Sun

Export Corporation, Bombay (supra) was overruled.

39.In the notification dated 09.07.2008, it is mentioned that anomalies/

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

47

deficiencies have been found in the notification dated 03.11.2005 and the

Industrial Policy 2004-2009, and therefore, modification in the Industrial

Policy 2004-2009 and notification dated 03.11.2005 is necessary. The

notification dated 30.09.2013 recites that “some anomalies had been

found” in the notification dated 05.04.2008 and that apart, supersession of

the earlier notification issued is not mentioned in the notification dated

09.07.2008, and therefore, in the matter of grant of relaxation/exemption/

concession, there may be possibility of misunderstanding, as a result of

which issuance of the notification dated 30.09.2013 is necessitated. The

impugned notification dated 12.11.2014 purports to clear the confusion

with regard to the earlier notifications without even referring to in which

respects there may be confusion. A bald statement is made that

notification dated 30.09.2013 is ambiguous.

40.The notifications dated 03.11.2005, 09.07.2008 and 30.09.2013, as

noted earlier, were issued under the provisions of Section 3-B(b) (wrongly

referred as 3-B) of the Act. The notification dated 05.04.2006 recites that

the same was issued under Section 3(c) of the Act, though there is no

Section 3(c). In essence, the same is also issued under Section 3-B(b) of

the Act.

41.Section 3-B(b) of the Act reads as under:

“3-B. Power to exempt. – Where the State Government is of

opinion that,-

(i) in order to encourage the establishment of any particular

industry or class of industries in the State; or

(ii) having regard to the particular circumstances of any

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

48

industry or class of industries; or

(iii) in order to extend facilities to such persons or class of

persons and for such purpose as the State Government may,

by notification specify;

it is necessary or expedient so to do in public interest, it may, by

notification and subject to such conditions, if any, as it may

specify in the notification, -

(a) exempt from payment of duty in whole or in part -

(i) any distributor of electrical energy or producer in respect of the

electrical energy sold or supplied to such industry for the purpose

thereof,

(ii) where any producer or class of producers runs the industry, in

respect of the electrical energy consumed by such producer or

class of producers for the purpose of such industry;

(iii) any distributor of electrical energy or producer in respect of

the electrical energy sold to or used for consumption by person or

class of persons and for purposes specified in the notification;

(b) cancel any such notification and again subject, by a like

notification, the distributor of electrical energy or producer or

class of such producers to the payment of such duty in respect of

such sale, supply or consumption of electrical energy.”

42.Though, number of exemption notifications, as noticed above, came

to be issued, grant of exemption of electricity duty up to 15 years from

the date of commencement of commercial production was consistently

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

49

maintained in all these notifications. Exemption from payment of electricity

duty was available irrespective of the fact as to whether electricity was for

self consumption/use or for the purpose of producing electricity and selling

the same.

43.The notification dated 12.11.2014 for the first time introduced that

exemption upto 15 years from the date of commencement of commercial

production from payment of electricity duty payable is relatable to only in

respect of electrical units consumed for its own use, that too, with

retrospective effect from 01.11.2004.

44.One aspect that has to be taken note of at this juncture is that it is

not the case presented on behalf of the State that electricity producing

units, at the time of selling the same, was realising electricity duty from the

buyers and thus, they had made undue gain and profit at the expense of

general public on the strength of exemption granted. The Distribution

Companies, in normal course, is to realise electricity duty from the

consumers. The State has also not indicated as to whether the Distribution

Companies, who, after purchasing electricity from the electricity producing

companies, while selling the same to its consumers, had charged

electricity duty or not. These aspects of the matter, which are very

relevant, had not been adverted to by the State.

45.Thus, the notification dated 12.11.2014 has curtailed/restricted

exemption granted towards payment of electricity duty only to the extent of

consumption for its own use. Prior to issuance of the said notification, the

eligible petitioners were granted exemption from payment of electricity duty

irrespective of the fact as to whether they had used electricity for its own

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

50

use or for generating electricity for the purpose of onward sale.

46.Section 3-B of the Act provides that where the State Government is

of the opinion that (i) in order to encourage the establishment of any

particular industry or class of industries in the State; or (ii) having regard to

the particular circumstances of any industry or class of industries; or (iii) in

order to extend facilities to such persons or class of persons and for such

purpose as the State Government may, by notification specify; it is

necessary or expedient so to do in public interest, it may, by notification

and subject to such conditions, if any, as it may specify in the notification, -

(a) exempt from payment of duty in whole or in part - (i) any distributor of

electrical energy or producer in respect of the electrical energy sold or

supplied to such industry for the purpose thereof, (ii) where any producer

or class of producers runs the industry, in respect of the electrical energy

consumed by such producer or class of producers for the purpose of such

industry; (iii) any distributor of electrical energy or producer in respect of

the electrical energy sold to or used for consumption by person or class of

persons and for purposes specified in the notification.

47.Section 3-B(b) of the Act provides for cancellation of any such

notification granting exemption and again subject, by a like notification, the

distributor of electrical energy or producer or class of such producers to

the payment of such duty in respect of such sale, supply or consumption of

electrical energy.

48.Section 3-B(b) of the Act, on a plain reading, does not authorise

cancellation of any such notification granting exemption benefit with

retrospective effect.

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

51

49.On the basis of the Industrial Policy 2004-2009, without making any

differentiation as to whether electricity is being used for its own use or for

the purpose of generating electricity for onward sale to Distribution

Companies and other entities, new industrial units were granted exemption

from payment of electricity duty. Admittedly, by the notification dated

12.11.2014, the concession/exemption from payment of electricity duty has

been done away with in respect of electricity sold by such new industrial

units. Therefore, the argument of Mr. Verma that the notification dated

12.11.2014 is not a notification withdrawing exemption/concession already

granted with respect to selling of electricity with retrospective effect, but

the same is only a clarificatory notification, is without any substance.

50.The notification dated 12.11.2014 does not indicate that such

notification has been issued in public interest. From the averments made

in paragraph 14 of the return of the State, it is manifest that the notification

dated 12.11.2014 came to be issued solely because the petitioners had

started earning profits. If profits are earned legitimately, the same cannot

be construed to be detrimental to public interest, necessitating withdrawing

a notification retrospectively.

51.Present is not a case that the petitioners had misused the provisions

of Industrial Policy 2004-2009 and the notifications issued from time to

time to implement the policy or that they had taken undue advantage. It is

also not the case presented that the petitioners did not have any vested

right towards exemption of payment of electricity duty for own consumption

as well as for sale of electricity. In the above background, bearing in mind

the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the doctrine of

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

52

promissory estoppel, we are of the opinion that notification dated

12.11.2014, which was deemed to have come into force with retrospective

effect from 01.11.2004 and which was issued in supersession of earlier

notifications with respect to exemption from payment of electricity duty

under Industrial Policy 2004-2009, cannot be sustained in law so far it

relates to nullifying exemption granted in respect of sale of electricity.

52.With regard to post-12.11.2014, it is noticed that by means of interim

order(s), it was provided that the petitioners shall not be compelled to

deposit electricity duty payable up to 12.11.2014. At the same time, the

petitioners were directed to pay the amount of electricity duty from

13.11.2014. It is submitted by learned counsel for the parties that

accordingly, the petitioners have been paying electricity duty from

13.11.2014. Period of 15 years from the date of commencement of

commercial production in respect of the petitioners is also over, save and

except in case of the petitioner in WPC No. 1829/2016. At any rate, the

petitioner in WPC No. 1829/2016, having not commenced commercial

production before 31.12.2009, even otherwise, was not entitled to

exemption from payment of electricity duty under the Industrial Policy

2004-2009. Interim order to pay electricity duty from 13.11.2014, it has to

be understood, was not in respect of self-consumption of electricity, as the

notification dated 12.11.2014 retained exemption in that respect, but the

same was in relation to sale of electricity by the petitioners. The incidence

of payment of electricity duty is finally borne by the consumers. Therefore,

it cannot be countenanced that petitioners have/had suffered any prejudice

because of the notification dated 12.11.2014 so far as its prospective

operation is concerned. Doctrine of promissory estoppel is an equitable

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

53

remedy and has to be moulded depending on the fact situation. In the

attending facts and circumstances, it will be wholly inequitable to pin down

the authorities to pre-12.11.2014 position. In that view of the matter, we are

of the opinion that no further orders are called for with regard to payment

of electricity duty with effect from 13.11.2014.

53.Accordingly, the writ petitions stand disposed of providing that the

respondents shall not recover any amount towards electricity duty from the

petitioners up to 12.11.2014.

54.No costs.

Sd/- Sd/-

(Arup Kumar Goswami) (Deepak Kumar Tiwari)

CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE

Amit

2022:CGHC:24649-DB

Neutral Citation

Reference cases

Description

Legal Notes

Add a Note....