MY KOLKATA EDUGRAPH
ADVERTISEMENT
regular-article-logo Sunday, 22 December 2024

Supreme Court rejects Adani Power plea for Rs 1,300 crore as late payment surcharge from Rajasthan government

The top court, in its 2020 verdict, had upheld the orders of the Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission and the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, observing that the Adani firm was entitled to a compensatory tariff from Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited but not to the LPS as claimed

Our Legal Correspondent New Delhi Published 19.03.24, 10:46 AM
Representational image

Representational image File picture

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea of Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd seeking over Rs 1,300 crore as a late payment surcharge from the Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, a Rajasthan government-owned power distribution firm.

Imposing Rs 50,000 as cost on Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd, a bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar ruled that filing of a miscellaneous application was not the proper legal recourse to late payment surcharge (LPS) by the Adani firm.

ADVERTISEMENT

“A relief of this nature cannot be asked for in a miscellaneous application which was described in the course of the hearing as an application for clarification,” SC said.

The Adani firm was seeking modification of a three-judge bench verdict delivered on August 30, 2020, on the plea of JVVNL through a miscellaneous application which is filed in pending cases.

The top court, in its 2020 verdict, had upheld the orders of the Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission and the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, observing that the Adani firm was entitled to a compensatory tariff but not to the LPS as claimed.

“A post disposal application for modification and clarification of the order of disposal shall lie only in rare cases, where the order passed by this Court is executory and the directions of the Court may become impossible to be implemented because of subsequent events or developments. The factual background of this application does not fit into that description,” the bench said.

“We dismiss the present application. This application was listed before us on several occasions and for that reason, we impose costs of Rs 50,000/- to be paid by the applicant...,” Justice Bose said.

Follow us on:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT