Point of Law: Section 22(C) determine jurisdiction of Permanent Lok Adalat and it adumbrate that the Permanent Lok Adalat shall exercise jurisdiction in respect of any matter relating to an offence, which is compoundable under any law.

JUDGMENT :

1. By the present writ petition, the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (MSEDCL), a licensee under the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 2003 Act’), question the legality of the award passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Aurangabad, in Pre-litigation Application Dispute No.44/2018, under which the petitioner has been directed to issue regular bills to the applicant Shri. Badrinath Pema Rathod, who had instituted the said application. Further direction is issued to the applicant to clear the bills and on payment of the same, the petitioner is directed not to disconnect his electricity supply.

2. Heard the learned Counsel Shri. A.S. Shelke for the petitioner and the learned Counsel Shri. S. P. Koli for the respondent.

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the parties.

3. Before the merits of the award impugned can be appreciated, it is apposite to refer to the brief facts leading to the passing of the impugned award by the Permanent Lok Adalat.

Shri. Badrinath Pema Rathod, resident of Plot No. 48, Bhakti Nagar, Aurangabad, is the owner of the house property situated on the plot and is availing the electricity supply with the consumer number being allotted, for his residential house. On 06/12/2016, the Flying Squad, Jalna, checked his electricity meter, which was found to be tampered, installed a new meter. He was served with the assessment bill of Rs.9,490/-. The assessment was disputed by the respondent and he raised grievance with the petitioner. The Flying Squad, which had checked the meter, since noticed that the respondent was indulged in theft of electricity and an offence came to be registered against him under Section 135 of the 2003 Act. His existing meter was seized as per the prescribed process and a bill was issued to him as per assessment sheet.

4. The respondent being aggrieved by the action of the petitioner, filed an application under Section 22 (C) of the Legal Services Authorities Act,1987 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1987 Act’), which was made over to the Permanent Lok Adalat, Aurangabad, being registered as Pre-litigation Application Dispute No.44/2018.

In the said application, he sought the relief of cancellation of the assessment bill issued to him, since it calculated the excess units. Pending hearing of the application, he sought directions to the authority, to issue regular bills to him and not to disconnect his electricity supply. He also prayed for compensation of Rs.10,000/- on account of the harassment faced by him at the instance of MSEDCL, Shahaganj Division, for mental harassment and economic loss.

The application was contested by the MSEDCL, by submitting that there is no valid, legal and existing cause of action to file the present application and since the application is not maintainable, it should be dismissed. It was specifically pleaded that the applicant was found guilty of theft of electricity and therefore, after removing the old meter, assessment bill was issued to him and a complaint has been lodged by invoking Section 135 of the 2003 Act. In view of the complaint being registered, it was submitted that the claim of cancellation of the electricity bill as per the assessment sheet, cannot be granted and the authority is not competent to direct cancellation of the electricity bill.

The documents in form of the complaint, assessment bill/sheet as well as the spot panchnama of the house of the applicant was also filed along with the written statement.

5. The Permanent Lok Adalat, constituted under the 1987 Act, proceeded with the application and on hearing the Counsel for the respective parties, recorded as under :-

“3. When the crime under section 135 of Indian Electricity Act is registered against the applicant this Permanent Lok Adalat is not having jurisdiction to decide that point and cannot pass award to the effect the electricity bill issued by the opponent is illegal and arbitrarily and