Vs.
EmailAppeal:
Petitioner:
Respondent:
Apeal:
Judges:
Date of Judgment: Feb 16, 2000
Head Note:
ELECTRICITY LAW
Constitution
Articles 14, 16 – Electricity Supply – Efforts to invite private persons in generation of electricity – Central and State Govt. adopting policy of optimum mix of liquid fuel project, hydel project and coal based project – Prioritisation to be done on basis of “least tariff” criteria – No comparison within fuel category – No decision to recommend liquid fuel project on prior-ity basis for Escrow Account Coverage – Reason of stay by High Court – Decision taken to recommend two coal based and one hydel based project for such coverage – If arbitrary. Held that not taking decision to recommend liquid fuel project would not vi-tiate the decision with respect to other projects and such deci-sion cannot be stated to have been taken to favour them. It also does not imply that optimum mix policy was given up.
(Para 22)
Constitution
Articles 14, 16 – Electricity Supply – Efforts to invite private persons in generation of electricity – Central and State Govt. adopting policy of optimum mix of liquid fuel project, hydel project and coal based project – Prioritisation to be done on basis of “least tariff” criteria – No comparison within fuel category – No decision to recommend liquid fuel project on prior-ity basis for Escrow Account Coverage – Reason of stay by High Court – Decision taken to recommend two coal based and one hydel based project for such coverage – If arbitrary. Held that not taking decision to recommend liquid fuel project would not vi-tiate the decision with respect to other projects and such deci-sion cannot be stated to have been taken to favour them. It also does not imply that optimum mix policy was given up.
(Para 22)
JUDGEMENT:
