wp30.11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.30 OF 2011 Mula Pravara Electric Co-operative Society Ltd. Shrirampur, Tq-Shrirampur, Through its Managing Director, Vijaykumar s/o Nathuprasad Pandit, R/o-Shrirampur, Tq-Shrirampur, Dist-Ahmednagar. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Energy, Labour and Industries Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32, 2) The Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission, Through its Secretary, World Trade Center, Center No.1, 13th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.V.D. Hon Advocate i/b. Shri. A.D. Shinde Advocate for Petitioner. Shri.V.D. Godbharle, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. Shri.Umakant Patil, Advocate for Intervenor - Ashok s/o Krishnaji Patwardhan. ... wp30.11 2 CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 7TH JANUARY, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Notice for suspension of distribution license granted in favour of the Petitioner is under challenge. Shri. Hon, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that hearing of the notice is listed before the Authorities at 3.00 p.m. today. The Petitioner has a remedy of filing statutory appeal under the provisions of Section 111 of the Electricity Act, 2003, in case any adverse order is passed. The learned counsel seeks two weeks protection in case any adverse order is passed against the Petitioner. It is an admitted position that the license granted in favour of the Petitioner is to expire on 31st January, 2011. It is further submitted that the wp30.11 3 State Government is bent upon to discontinue the Petitioner as a licensee and appoint some other agency. In between, it is alleged that the State Government is determined to appoint an Administrator. The learned counsel submitted that even the distribution license which is in operation till 31st January 2011, is very likely to be suspended. Reliance is placed on the Debates on the floors of the Legislative Assembly. 3. The learned A.G.P. submits that necessary party i.e. Respondent No.2 is not appearing in this matter as it is not served. The Petition is premature. The Petitioner has efficacious statutory remedies and therefore no protection be granted. 4. Shri. Umakant Patil, learned counsel applies by way of intervention. The learned counsel submits that Public Interest Litigation being Writ Petition No.2 of 2010 is already wp30.11 4 pending and is listed for hearing before the appropriate Court on 20th January, 2011. The counsel objects to grant protection to the Petitioner. 5. We have perused the notice for suspension of distribution license, dated 28th December, 2010. Six basic issues are raised in the notice. Reference has been given to an order passed by the Bombay High Court at Nagpur Bench in the proceedings of Writ Petition No.3399 of 2000 dated 30th April, 2003. The Respondent No.2 states in notice that as on 30th September, 2010, according to MSEDCL, a sum of over Rs.2222.035 Crores is due and outstanding from Mula Pravara to MSEDCL as per the tariff determined by the Commission. 6. In the light of the fact that the statutory remedy is available and in view of the gravity of the charges, we are not inclined to exercise our extra ordinary writ jurisdiction wp30.11 5 under Article-226 of the Constitution of India in accepting the request of the Petitioner for protecting the Petitioner in case an adverse order is passed. The Writ Petition is dismissed. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/JAN11/wp30.11