1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1501 OF 2010 Live Oak Resorts Private Limited ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. J. F. Reis i/b. Mr. Kunal Cheema for Petitioner. Mrs. M. P. Thakur – AGP for Respondent No. 1. Mr. Girish Kulkarni i/b. Ms. Kavita Anchan & S. D. Shetty i/b. M. V. Kini & Co. for Respondent Nos. 2 and 4. Mr. Ratnakar Singh for Respondent No. 3. CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : JULY 20, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. 2. The writ petition is directed against the communication dated 22nd July 2009 issued by Director (Tariff), MERC, whereby the petitioner has been informed that there is no linkage between supply voltage (HT or LT) and consumer categorization under Industrial or Commercial. In view of the fact that Resorts and Hotels are not an Industry, they have been categorized 2 either in LT-II (Commercial) or HT – II (Commercial). The petitioner was also informed that the Commission has sole jurisdiction in determining tariffs for different consumer categories. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said communication and therefore filed the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 4 as well as the learned counsel for respondent no. 3 have submitted that under Section 111 of the Electricity Act, 2003, there is a statutory remedy of appeal against the Order passed by MERC and therefore this Court may not exercise extra ordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the communication dated 22nd July 2009 is a communication simplicitor and cannot be termed as an order and therefore the petitioner cannot invoke the remedy of appeal under Section 111 of the Act. The counsel for the respondents specifically stated that the impugned communication is an order passed by MERC and the petitioner therefore is entitled to invoke the statutory appellate remedy provided under Section 111 of the Act. 5. In view of the above referred facts, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition in order to file an appeal under Section 111 of the Act, within a period of two weeks 3 from today. 6. In the circumstances, writ petition is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal within a period of two weeks from today, by keeping the issues raised in the petition open. The appellate authority is directed to decide the appeal, if filed by the petitioner against the impugned communication / order dated 22nd July 2009 in accordance with law and procedure applicable in this regard within a period of four months from the date of filing an appeal by the petitioner. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)