The Gujarat High Court on Thursday issued notices to Petroleum & Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB) and Adani Gas Limited over collection of additional security deposit from the latter's customers in Ahmedabad city.
The notices were issued by a division bench of Chief Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya and Justice J B Pardiwala while hearing a public interest litigation filed by customers of Adani Gas in Ahmedabad against charging of Rs 500 towards additional security deposit. The PNGRB and Adani Gas have been asked to file reply to the allegations made in the PIL within two weeks. Further hearing on the matter is scheduled after 15 days.
The petitioners Dhanesh Desai, Sanjay Raval and Bharat Shah have sought direction for Adani Gas to stop charging the security deposit which according to them was "illegal and unauthorised".
They have further contended in their PIL that the company had claimed that the security deposit was being charge as per the decision of the PNGRB.
However, in a reply to Right To Information (RTI) application regarding the PNGRB decision, the petitioners were told that the regulatory authority had never asked the gas company to charge additional security deposit.
According to the petitioners they made repeated representation to the Adani Gas for refund of the additional security deposit charges from them, but there was no response from the company.
They have also alleged that representation to the PNGRB seeking action against the Adani Gas for such 'illegal' charges also did not elicit any response.
Hence, as a last resort they have approached the High Court for refund of security deposit amount and action against Adani Gas.
The notices were issued by a division bench of Chief Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya and Justice J B Pardiwala while hearing a public interest litigation filed by customers of Adani Gas in Ahmedabad against charging of Rs 500 towards additional security deposit. The PNGRB and Adani Gas have been asked to file reply to the allegations made in the PIL within two weeks. Further hearing on the matter is scheduled after 15 days.
The petitioners Dhanesh Desai, Sanjay Raval and Bharat Shah have sought direction for Adani Gas to stop charging the security deposit which according to them was "illegal and unauthorised".
More From This Section
This charges by Adani Gas was over and above all other charges for installation of pipeline and supply of gas authorised by PNGRB.
They have further contended in their PIL that the company had claimed that the security deposit was being charge as per the decision of the PNGRB.
However, in a reply to Right To Information (RTI) application regarding the PNGRB decision, the petitioners were told that the regulatory authority had never asked the gas company to charge additional security deposit.
According to the petitioners they made repeated representation to the Adani Gas for refund of the additional security deposit charges from them, but there was no response from the company.
They have also alleged that representation to the PNGRB seeking action against the Adani Gas for such 'illegal' charges also did not elicit any response.
Hence, as a last resort they have approached the High Court for refund of security deposit amount and action against Adani Gas.