The Rajasthan excessive courtroom on Thursday dismissed a public curiosity litigation (PIL) difficult a three way partnership between the Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd (RRVUNL) and the Nationwide Thermal Energy Company (NTPC), whereas imposing a ₹1.5 lakh fantastic on the petitioner for submitting a “misconceived” petition.
The petitioner has been given two months to pay the quantity. (e-Committee, Supreme Court docket of India)
The courtroom noticed that the PIL was “nothing but an abuse of the process of law” and a “sheer wastage of precious time.”
The petitioner, Ajay Chaturvedi, a retired chief engineer, had sought to quash the three way partnership dated November 4, 2024, claiming it will result in greater electrical energy charges, opposite to public curiosity.
Nonetheless, the bench comprising Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Anand Sharma dismissed the plea, stating that the petition appeared “motivated” and filed with an “oblique motive.”
Additionally Learn: Rajasthan HC grants interim bail plea of Asaram, convicted for minor’s rape
In its order, the courtroom famous, “The petition, if we may say so, is not only utterly misconceived but appears to be filed with oblique motive… The joint venture has been entered into between the state and Government of India undertaking, not involving any private party, for the establishment of additional power generation units and cost-effective generation.”
The courtroom additional emphasised that the three way partnership aimed to reinforce effectivity and cut back era prices, with aims together with the institution of recent tremendous vital items on the Chhabra Thermal Energy Plant and the renovation of outdated items. It criticised the petitioner for speculating about future tariff hikes with out substantive grounds.
“The venture of the petitioner to file PIL is to seek judicial intervention towards assessment, at this stage, with regard to the rates of production and supply in future. The petitioner on his own figment of imagination has sought to canvass that such arrangements may lead to increased cost of production”, the courtroom mentioned.
Declaring the PIL an abuse of judicial course of, the courtroom imposed a further price of ₹1 lakh, on high of the ₹50,000 already deposited as safety. The petitioner has been given two months to pay the quantity.