( 1 ) MR R. C. Verma, the learned counsel enters appearance on behalf of the state of U. P. He is permitted to file the vakalatnama within a week from today,

( 2 ) LEAVE granted.

( 3 ) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties finally with their consent. The short question is whether the revenue recovery certificate issued by the 1st respondent on behalf of the State of U. P. for recovering the minimum guarantee charges as sought to be recovered by the respondent electricity Board from the appellant Industry could be legally sustained or not. The said recovery was challenged by the appellant in the writ petition on two grounds: (7) that under the relevant regulations when the connected additional load was reduced the minimum guarantee charges could not have been levied as if the appellant was a new consumer and alternatively, it was submitted that if Regulation 17 (ii) is pressed into service for sustaining the recovery, the said regulation was ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution.

( 4 ) THE High Court in the impugned judgment without addressing itself to these vital questions has observed that the appellant may seek the remedy by way of arbitration before a person nom