DISCOMS As State Bodies Duty Bound To Protect Consumers’ Interests: Rajasthan High Court

Case: Bhansali Dyeing v. State of Rajasthan & Ors and connected matters

Coram: Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati

Case No.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11242/2023

Court Observation: “This Court also observes that the respondent-DISCOMS are the bodies of the State Government and fall under the definition of ‘State’ as contained in Article 12 of the Constitution of India, and therefore, it is the duty of the State to protect the interests of the consumers; but despite the same, the respondents levied the additional cost in the name of Special Fuel Surcharge. The Special Fuel Surcharge would have been justified had it been only on the aforementioned original principal amount i.e. Rs.3,048.63/- Crores, but the Special Fuel Surcharge as imposed herein is not justified in law.”

Previous Posts

Yawning Gaps In Investigation: Telangana High Court Slams Probe In Pre-Matric Scholarship Scam, Acquits Four

NDPS Act | Statement Of Police Witnesses Cannot Be Discarded If They Inspire Confidence: Punjab & Haryana High Court

NDPS Act | Calcutta High Court Suspends Conviction Of Four, Cites Infirmities In Investigation & Violations Of Mandatory Statutory Provisions

Karnataka HC Pulls Up Milk Producers Federation For “Shunting” Reserved Category Candidate Sans Opportunity To Rectify Social Status Certificate

Lack Of Necessary Parties, Specific Averments In Writ Petition Can’t Be Cured By Filing Impleadment Application: Kerala High Court

Related Articles

• Rajasthan Stamp Act: Duty Can’t Be Levied On Transaction Not Having ‘Territorial Nexus’ With State: High Court
• Rajasthan High Court Sets Clear Guidelines on ‘Awaiting Posting Orders’ (APO) for Government Employees
• Child Born From Second Wife Of A Deceased Employee Eligible For Compassionate Appointment: Rajasthan High Court