LexLords NRI Legal Services Jalandhar By NRI Legal Services LexLords

NRI legal services https://lexlords.com/nri-legal-services-in-punjab-and-haryana/. of PPA about the quantum that is contracted with Essar Steel. On this basis, the Electricity Board itself furnished a statement to the Appellant, EPL showing that a sum of Rs. (2) As from the appointed day the State Government or any officer of the State Government shall have no jurisdiction to decide any such dispute pending before the State Government or any officer of the State Government immediately before the appointed day shall, as soon as may be, after the appointed day, be transferred to the Tribunal for its decision.

The intention of EPL is to recover the fixed charges is only from the two beneficiaries, in proportion to the allocated capacity. Under sub-Section (5) of Section 36 a person aggrieved by an order of dismissal, removal or reduction in rank has a remedy of an appeal before tribunal. 2003 demanded from EPL the payment of an aggregate amount of Rs. 2015 permitted the appellants to place on record the consent of the respondents and necessary documents to show that the respondents accepted transfer from PEPSU Roadways to the Corporation.

Hence this Court, apparently in the larger interest of justice, by order dated 20. 1956 informing the General Manager, PEPSU Roadways of Governments decision on the subject of transfer of PEPSU Roadways to the Corporation was not placed before the High Court by the writ petitioners although it finds a specific mention in Order no. 537 crores on account of alleged diversion of power by EPL to Essar Steels Ltd for the period commencing from 01. 2006, the Electricity Board accepted to receive Rs.

1 of the present PPA records the capacity allocated to the Essar Group companies along with the capacity allocated to GUVNL shows that intention of the parties was to provide for allocation in the proportion of 138:192 (while working in open cycle mode) and 215:300 (while working in combined cycle mode). 345 of 1940 arising out of the Judgment and Decree dated the 24th August, 1940, of the Court of the Special Judge, 1st Grade of Shahjahanpur in Miscellaneous Case No.

Josna Casting Centre Orissa Pvt. Otherwise there is no reason for mentioning in Article 3. It is significant to note that the letter of Chief Secretary dated 16. The fact that Article 3. 1 of the PPA as also the corresponding Articles in the PPA with Essar Steel, it is clear that the intention of the parties was that the capacity of the generating plant will be shared between the two beneficiaries only. The additional fresh documents were filed after service upon the respondents who were granted accommodation on that ground on 24.

During the arguments, the Learned Counsel for the Respondent also clarified that apart from the two purchasers of power there is no other third party sale that has taken place. 1956 passed by the General Manager, PEPSU Road Transport Corporation. 1996 to 31st March 1999. Thereafter, through their letter dated 13. Union of India (1981) 1 SCC 166 this Court held that the concept of public purpose implies that acquisition or requisition of property is in the interest of general public and the purpose for which such acquisition or requisition is made directly and vitally subserves public interest.

64 crores is payable for the aforesaid period and on the aforesaid basis, the EPL accepted the same as a part of overall package and authorized the Electricity Board to recover the same on a condition that the same methodology would be adopted in future also. If the proportionate principle is acceptable for recovery of fixed charges, it cannot be abandoned for allocation of supply. 52 of 1940 and Original Suit No. The Appellant is a wholly owned Public Sector Undertaking of the Government of Orissa.

The suit giving rise to the present appeal was decided by the Bombay High Court during the pendency of Chiranjit Lal Chowdhuri's petition in the Supreme Court: This decision was delivered on 4th December, 1950. The additional documents were filed with an affidavit on behalf of appellants and include a copy of letter dated 16. It is also an admitted fact that the parties thereafter held several rounds of discussions and as a result of those discussions, a settlement was actually arrived at by the parties in October 2004.

Pursuant to the said settlement, NRI legal services (read more) the Electricity Board recalculated the amount, due on the basis of power supplied by the EPL to Essar Steels Ltd in excess of the allocated capacity of 215 MW shall alone be treated as sold and supplied by the Electricity Board. Section 39 (9) provides for the orders which can be passed by the tribunal upon finding that the dismissal, removal or reduction in rank of a headmaster, teacher or member of the non-teaching staff is unlawful or unjustified.

2 Delivery of Active Energy The Company shall deliver Active Energy and Reactive Energy to the Board at the Delivery Point in accordance with Dispatch Instructions issued by the Board under the Dispatch procedures as specified in Schedule VI. Appeal from the Judgment and Decree dated the 22nd August, 1944, of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Verma and Hamilton JJ. 64 crores for diverting the electricity to the Essar Steels Ltd. Similarly, the fact that the PPA with Essar Steel states the allocation to GUVNL goes to show that the allocation was intended to be on a proportionate basis, between the two parties / purchasers only.

It is an admitted fact that the Electricity Board through its letter dated 29. 5 From the reading of the Article 3. This is clear from the reading of the two PPAs. The Appellant finances medium and large scale NRI Legal Services industries within the State of Orissa and is also involved in setting up joint sector industries with private entrepreneurs. The Appellant extended a term loan of Rs. The respondents have not objected to the correctness and authenticity of the additional documents and hence those documents have been taken on record and used by learned NRI legal services (read more) senior counsel for the appellants in support of his contentions.

Under Section 39 (4) the tribunal is empowered to decide among other things a dispute of the nature referred to in sub-Section (1) of Section 38 or an appeal under sub-Section (5) of Section 36. Hence, EPL cannot argue that the PPA does not recognise the proportionate principle at all.