Sri G Manjunath vs. The Managing Director

Held

The Court directed the third respondent (Assistant Executive Engineer, BESCOM) to consider and dispose of the representations contained in Annexures C and D, as well as the objections to the demand notice dated 06.01.2020. This consideration must be done after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and must be communicated through a speaking order. The disposal is to be completed within three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the Court's order. The Court did not delve into the merits of the demand notice or the petitioner's GST liability, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of considering the representations.

Facts

The petitioner, Sri G Manjunath, proprietor of M/s M V Enterprises, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents, Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. and Bengaluru Electric Supply Company (BESCOM) and its Assistant Executive Engineer, to consider his representations dated December 18, 2019, and December 19, 2019, and restore electricity supply to his property. The petitioner had submitted these representations in response to a demand notice. The respondents, represented by their counsel, agreed to take suitable action in accordance with the law on the petitioner's representations and objections to the demand notice.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Court should direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representations dated 18.12.2019 and 19.12.2019 and restore electricity supply? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and administrative law). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the respondents to consider his representations and restore electricity supply. Respondents' contention: The respondents stated that suitable action would be taken in accordance with law on the petitioner's representations and objections to the demand notice.