[Coronavirus Lockdown] Karnataka HC imposes 50k costs on petitioner who challenged govt directions to electricity supply companies

The Karnataka High Court recently imposed costs of Rs. 50,000 in a petition seeking to quash a government circular dated April 3, by which directions were issued to Electricity Supply Companies (ESCOMs) amid the COVID-19 lockdown. [PC Rao vs The State of Karnataka].The Division Bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice BV Nagarathna dismissed the petition after observing that filing of the same is an "abuse of process of law" and that there was no public interest involved in it.."This Court is dealing with the very important issues such as non-availability of the food and necessities of life to the weaker sections of the society. In our view, the petitioners ought not to have filed the present petition. Firstly, because no public interest is involved in this petition and secondly, a petition seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus is filed on the very day on which a representation was made to the State Government and other Authorities."Karnataka High Court.The Court held that the government order in question was issued after taking note of the fact that consumers were unable to pay their electricity bills, which was in turn affecting the liquidity of the ESCOMs. The state had directed the companies to issue bills for April 2020 on the basis of average electricity consumption..The Court noted that the circular also directed the opening of various modes such as the Karnataka One Website/App, BBPS payment by use of all banks debit cards, credit cards, internet banking, wallet payment, UPI payments, PayU App etc. and IMI mobile App for making payment. .The High Court also observed the fact that the circular clearly states that this was "a one time measure" for the current month, keeping in view the COVID–19 situation. This apart, the Court also noted that the circular mentioned that from May 1 onwards, the meter reading, billing and collection activities shall continue in the regular way. Further, the circular read that any difference in the average bill and the actual reading may be adjusted in the following month's bill, the Court pointed out..The petitioner, however, argued that such a circular ought to have been issued by the Karnataka Electricity Regulation Commission (KERC) and not by the Government of Karnataka. It was further submitted that in other states, moratorium has been issued for payment of electricity bills. .After hearing the arguments, the Court opined that the act of the state in itself was in public interest,"The Government circular in fact facilitates payment of the electricity bills by the citizens sitting at their respective homes by use of various modes as specified therein....The notification takes care of the excess payments made by the consumers in terms of the bills issued for April 2020, by providing that any difference in the average bill and the bill issued on the basis of the actual reading will be adjusted in the following month’s bill. Thus, we find that the act of the State Government of issuing the circular dated 3rd April 2020 which is impugned in this petition, is itself in the public interest.".The Court went on to add that the issue of grant of moratorium to pay the electricity bills involves a policy decision. .On these grounds, the Karnataka High Court imposed an amount of Rs.50,000 as costs and further directed that the amount be payable to the Chief Minister’s COVID–19 Relief Fund within two weeks..While passing such direction, the Court also made it clear that the order would not prevent the KERC and the Government of Karnataka from considering the petitioner's representation in due accordance with law.[Read Judgment]