The Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, a Rajasthan government-owned power distribution firm, on Wednesday vehemently opposed in the Supreme Court a plea of Adani Power seeking over Rs 1,300 crore as late payment surcharge (LPS) from the state discom. A bench comprising Justices Aniruddha Bose and PV Sanjay Kumar reserved its order on Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd’s (APRL) petition pertaining to its demand for late payment surcharge after hearing heated arguments by senior lawyers Abhishek Singhvi and Dushyant Dave.
While Singhvi represented the Adani firm, Dave appeared for Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (JVVNL). The Adani firm’s plea before the bench was in news after the apex court on Tuesday pulled up its registry for not listing the case for unspecified reasons despite a judicial order to post it.
“The court proposes and the registry disposes. This cannot be done in the high courts. When registry defies court orders, should it not be viewed seriously? You should pass a judicial order,” Dave submitted on Tuesday, prompting the bench to direct the registry to put up the case before it on Wednesday.
The court on Wednesday heard the plea as the first item for nearly three hours before reserving the judgement.
The two senior lawyers indulged in sharp exchange of words during the arguments.
At the outset, Singhvi said the miscellaneous application (MA) of the Adani firm was maintainable. However, he was willing to withdraw it to seek appropriate remedies at an appropriate forum.
“It is maintainable. The MA can be filed. But, if the lordships say otherwise, I will withdraw for appropriate remedies,” the senior lawyer said.
“I object to this withdrawal symptom. This is an abuse of process,” Dave remonstrated, asserting the counsel for the Adani firm misled the court by filing a miscellaneous application in a case already decided by the apex court.
“You cannot be granted this, not in the larger public interest. Rs 1,400 crores sought to be extracted from the State…,” Dave said, alleging that the Adani firm was attempting to take undue benefit of “the kindness shown by the court”.
Dave questioned why the Adani firm did not file a review plea against the 2020 SC judgement.
The Adani firm is seeking modification of a three-judge bench verdict delivered on August 30, 2020 on the plea of JVVNL through a miscellaneous application which are filed in pending cases.
The top court, in its 2020 verdict, had upheld the orders of the Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission and the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, observing that the Adani firm was entitled to compensatory tariff but not to the LPS as claimed.
Singhvi objected to the arguments of Dave, saying that he was advancing submissions on merits.
“Don’t interrupt. I am showing how you misled the court,” Dave said, adding that the plea of the Adani firm should not have been entertained by the apex court registry.
“The registry passes orders day in and day out. Your Lordships may not be able to rein in the registry… let me assure you. It is a cause of serious heartburn,” Dave said.
“Don’t be petty, please,” Singhvi responded.
“The use of such adjectives is only abuse. Let us not address innuendos and insinuations. I will exercise my rights…,” Singhvi said.
The Adani firm has sought payment of Rs 1376. 35 crore as the LPS “outstanding” since June 30, 2022 in terms of the power purchase agreement. The state discom, JVVNL, has opposed the plea, saying it was filed in a case already decided by the top court in 2020.
