[2026:JHHC:10500] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P(C) No. 7724 of 2006 Shri Nanak Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd., a Company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 having its Factory at Rauta, Ramgarh, District- Hazaribagh through one of its Directors, Amit Gupta son of K.P. Gupta, resident of 38, North West Circuit House Area, Road No.15, Sonari, town, Jamshedpur, District-Singhbhum East. ..... … Petitioner Versus 1. Jharkhand State Electricity Board through its Chairman, having its office at Engineers Bhawan, HEC Dhurva, Ranchi. 2. General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Hazaribagh Area Electricity Board, Hazaribagh. 3. Electrical Superintending Engineer, Hazaribagh Electrical Circle, Hazaribagh. 4. Electrical Executive Engineer (Commerce & Revenue), Hazaribagh Electrical Circle, Hazaribagh. 5. Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Sainik Bazar, Main Road, Ranchi. ..... … Respondents -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : None. For the Resp. No. 5 : Mr. Navin Kumar, Advocate. ------ 04/ 09.04.2026 Nobody has responded on behalf of the petitioner, in spite of repeated calls. Learned counsel appearing for the Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission is present. 2. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the bill for the month of October, 2006, which was the first bill served to the petitioner and it has been stated that the same has been raised in violation of the provision of clause 4(C) of the High Tension Agreement entered into between the petitioner and the respondent-Board. [2026:JHHC:10500] -2- 3. The Co-ordinate bench of this court on 24.07.2012 [order No. 3] has passed the following order:- “Learned counsel for the parties submitted that the issue raised in the writ petition is related to the controversy whether clause-4(C) of the High Tension Agreement or the tariff of JS.E.B notification would prevail in the matter of raising of bills applicable to the H.T.S. Consumer, which is itself the subject matter of proceeding pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition(Civil) arising out of the judgment and order dated 5th July, 2011 passed in L.P.A. No. 466 of 2010 passed by the Division Bench of this court and in the said S.L.P. interim order directing for refund/recovery, by the learned Single Judge and affirmed by the Division Bench of this court has been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. In the aforesaid situation, it is submitted that the instant matter may be kept in abeyance awaiting decision of the said S.L.P. In that view of the matter, let the instant writ petition go out of list with a liberty to the parties to mention any subsequent development or final decision rendered in the aforesaid S.L.P. pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.” 4. From the records, it transpires that the said SLP has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. 5. In view of the above, it transpires that nothing survives in the present writ petition and that is why the counsel for the petitioner has not appeared before this court to pursue this matter. As such, this petition is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-09.04.2026 Amitesh/-