https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169670 A statutory power to fix grid tariff was not invalid merely because regulations under section 79(h) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 had not yet been framed, since section 46(1) did not make regulations a condition precedent and the Act itself supplied adequate guidance and control. The tariff notifications were therefore upheld against the arbitrariness challenge. Writ relief under Article 226 was also declined for the period before the petition, because the claim was delayed, refund to consumers was unlikely, and reopening the levy would have caused unjust enrichment. The tariff scheme was thus sustained in principle, with relief denied for the earlier period. en-us Fri, 08 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:26:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169670 A statutory power to fix grid tariff was not invalid merely because regulations under section 79(h) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 had not yet been framed, since section 46(1) did not make regulations a condition precedent and the Act itself supplied adequate guidance and control. The tariff notifications were therefore upheld against the arbitrariness challenge. Writ relief under Article 226 was also declined for the period before the petition, because the claim was delayed, refund to consumers was unlikely, and reopening the levy would have caused unjust enrichment. The tariff scheme was thus sustained in principle, with relief denied for the earlier period. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 08 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169670