Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : A.SAMBASIVA RAO, K.JAYACHANDRA REDDY
Mohd.Abdul Gaffar - Appellant
Versus
A.P. State Electricity Board - Respondent
Decided On : 03-18-75
ELECTRICITY - SUPPLEMENTARY BILLS - MONTHLY MINIMUM CHARGES - POWER TO FIX - GUIDELINES - ARBITRARINESS - PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE - LIMITATION - ELECTRICITY (SUPPLY) ACT, 1948, SECS. 49, 59.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, consumers of electric energy for non-domestic purposes, challenged the supplementary electricity bills issued by the respondent Electricity Board for the period October 1968 to September 1972, claiming that the Board had no power to issue such bills and that the demand was barred by limitation.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the Board had the power to fix terms and conditions for the supply of electricity, including the power to fix monthly minimum charges, and that the fixation of such charges was not arbitrary as it was based on the nature of the supply, the purpose for which it was required, and the need for simplification and standardization of methods and rates of charges.
Issues: 1. Whether the Electricity Board had the power to fix monthly minimum charges for non-domestic consumers of electric energy? 2. Whether the fixation of monthly minimum charges was arbitrary? 3. Whether the issuance of supplementary bills without prior notice violated the principles of natural justice? 4. Whether the demand was barred by limitation?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Board had the power to fix monthly minimum charges under Section 49 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, which empowered the Board to fix terms and conditions for the supply of electricity, including uniform tariffs. 2. The Court found that the fixation of monthly minimum charges was not arbitrary as it was based on the nature of the supply, the purpose for which it was required, and the need for simplification and standardization of methods and rates of charges, as required under Section 49(2) of the Act. 3. The Court held that the issuance of supplementary bills without prior notice did not violate the principles of natural justice as the consumers were aware of the revised rates and monthly minimum charges from the date of the Board's proceedings in July 1968, and they could have sought permission to pay the amount in installments. 4. The Court declined to decide the issue of limitation as it was a question of fact that could be determined only after recording evidence and investigating various facts.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the writ petitions filed by the petitioners, upholding the validity of the supplementary bills issued by the Electricity Board.
( 1 ) 1. These ten petitions are of one piece, have been heard together and can be conveniently disposed of by a common orders W. P. No. 1074/73 has peen referred to a Division Bench by our learned brother Chennakesav Reddy, J. on the ground that there is an apparent conflict between the decision renderd in W. P. No. 64/73 by Ramachandra Rao, J. and those in W. P. Nos, 534/73 etc. by madhava Reddy, J. in the company of that petition the other nine also have come before us, as all of them raise identical questions.
( 2 ) THE questions relate to the payment of supplementary electricity bills issued by the respondent viz. . The andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board to the petitioners. All of them are consumers of electric energy for non-domestic purposes. The supplementary bills which have been issued to them and are challenged now relate to their business, commercial and other non-domestic establishments. Though the details as to actual amounts demanded vary from case to case the material facts in all of them are similar. We will here notice the salient circumstances which occured in W. P, no. 1074/73. It is alleged : The petitioner has been running a business establishment in Ablds centre in Hyderabad city. He had been connected with electric supply eversince the commencement of his venture. In order to collect charges from him, a meter was installed in his place of business and the respondent and Its predecessors have been issuing bills as per the readings of the meter recording the consumption of energy. In January 1973 the petitioner received a bill dt. 25-1-1973 which is called a supplementary bill demanding from him a sum of Rs. 1,137. 30 ps. for the consumption of electric energy by the petitioner from October 1968 to september 1972. He was allowed time till 24th February 1973 for its payment. It is said that the basis of the supplemental bill is what is called "connected load". The respondent has no power or right to issue supplementary bills, since whatever energy the petitioner has been consuming he had been paying for it as per the meter readings. Some representations were made by some consumers in regard to this illegal demand buc the respondent s officials were threatenlng with disconnection of electric supply. Further, the claim by the respondent is barred by limitation.
( 3 ) THE Deputy Chief Accountant of the Electricity Board filed a counter affidavit. That affidavit states that the board is a statutory corporation and is vested with the responsibility of supply of electricity to the consumers on such terms and conditions as it may choose to fix. In exercis of its powers under Sec. 49 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948, the board framed its own terms and conditions of supply. Sec. 59 of the Electricity (supply) Act enjoins upon the Board to carry on its operations in such a manner as would not result in a loss. Consequently, the charges for supply will have to be changed from time to time according to the exigencies and requirements of the situation. Sec. 49 has been held to be constitutionally valid by the supreme Court of India and this Court ruled that the terms and conditions for supply framed under Sec. 49 override the provisions of any agreement entered into by the consumer. The petitioner has been running a "gold ornaments" shop. In exercise of its powers under Sec, 49, the board fixed certain terms and conditions for supply of electricity to consumers and notified them in its proceedings ms. No. 613 dt. 9-7-1968 making It applicable to various consumers availing non-domestic supply from the Board. Besides revising the rates for consumption, certain monthly minimum charges were also fixed as proclaimed the afore said proceedings. The monthly minimum charges fixed are as under. Class of consumer. MONTHLY MINIMUM Connected load of KW and below. CHARGES Above KW and not exceeding 1 KW above 1 KW hotels, Restaurants, eating houses, shops, theatres and Cinemas. Rs. 5/. Rs. 25/- rs. 25/- for
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.