CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.1583 of 2000 In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 1. BIHAR STATE P.S.C.POLES MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION through its President Shri Pravin Kumar Sinha, situated at 2nd floor, Jagdish Bhawan, Exhibition Road, Patna -1 2. Shri Pravin Kumar Sinha, son of Late Ramanand Sinha, resident of 2/14, Rajendra Nagar, PS Kadamkuan, District and Town Patna, President of Bihar State PSC Poles Manufacturers Association …….. Petitioners Versus 1. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, through its Chairman, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 2. The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, through its Chairman, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 3. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, through its Chairman, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 4. The Chief Engineer (Stores and Purchase) Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 5. The Electrical Superintending Engineer (Stores and Purchase) Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 6. The State of Bihar through the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Department of Industries, Bihar, Patna 7. The Industrial Development Commissioner, Department of Industries, Bihar, Patna 8. The Director of Industries, Bihar, Patna 9. Patliputra Prestressed (P) Ltd. ……………..Respondents With CWJC No.2971 of 2000 M/S FERRO CONCRETE INDUSTRIES ……… Petitioner Versus THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD &ORS ……Respondents ******** Appearance For the Petitioner : Mr.Vinay Kirti Singh For the Respondent- Electricity Board : Mr. Shree Prakash Singh ********* P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH S K Katriar, J. CWJC No. 1583 of 2000 has been preferred for a direction to the Bihar State Electricity Board and its functionaries to purchase their entire requirement of PSC poles from the member units of the petitioner Association. The petitioner is an Association of different units manufacturing PSC poles which are mainly used regarding transmission of electric power. These units were earlier 2 receiving orders for supply of PSC poles. In view of certain intervening circumstances, the respondent Board stopped placing orders for PSC poles with the different units leading to CWJC No.2312 of 1988, wherein the respondent Board initially took the stand that it has set up its own manufacturing units and, therefore, there is no need to purchase PSC poles from other units. The petitioners had in reply submitted that the Board is unable to manufacture the required quantity for its use and, therefore, the balance quantity should be purchased from the units of the petitioner Association. The writ petition ended in a compromise and was accordingly disposed of by order dated 16.1.1989 (Annexure 2). The relevant portion of the order is reproduced hereinbelow:- “After considerable argument learned counsel for the parties have ultimately agreed and the State Electricity Board has also agreed that the Board is prepared to take the P.S.C. Pole from the pole manufacturers who are members of the petitioner no.1 according to the requirements of the Board on the prices which may be revised from time to time on the recommendation of the Committee. The petitioners have also agreed to this formula and want that this application may be disposed of in these terms. This writ petition is, therefore, disposed of on the above terms.” 2. It appears that inspite of the said consent order dated 16.1.1989, various units of the petitioner Association did not receive orders for supply of PSC poles leading to the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the parties submit in one voice that the duty and the task of distribution and rural electrification in the State of Bihar has been passed on to the Power Grid Corporation of 3 India except five districts, namely, Patna, Madhepura, Muzaffarpur, Katihar, and Aurangabad, and urban centres. Learned counsel for the respondents submits on instructions that the Board is promise-bound to purchase its requirements which it is unable to meet from its own factories, from the units of the petitioner Association. In view of the assurance, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition. 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn. 5. CWJC No. 2971 of 2000 shall be governed by this order. ( S K Katriar, J.) ( Jayanandan Singh, J.) Patna High Court, Patna The 26th of July 2010 NAFR/mrl