Back
2018 Supreme(Pat) 1094
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Nilu Agrawal, J.
Ambika Bhawani Cold Storage Private Limited - Appellant
Vs.
North Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited - Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14279 of 2017
Decided On : 31-07-2018
Suraj Samdarshi, Adv., Indrajesh Kumar, Adv., Vinay Kirti Singh, Adv., Vijay Kumar Verma, Adv., Akhileshwar Singh, Adv.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that charges for the disconnected period cannot be levied if found to be inconsistent with previous orders and legal provisions, as interpreted by the court.
Headnote:
Electricity Bill - Disconnection Charges - Bihar Electricity Supply (2nd Amendment) Code, 2007 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Clause 7.14(4) of the Code, 2007, Clause 10.20, Clause 10.14(C) of the Code, 2007 - The court discussed the provisions of the Bihar Electricity Supply (2nd Amendment) Code, 2007, particularly Clause 7.14(4), Clause 10.20, and Clause 10.14(C), and their interpretation in relation to the disputed electricity bill. The court also referenced previous judgments to support its decision.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought quashing of an outstanding electricity bill for the disconnection period between September, 2013 to March, 2017, which was challenged as being incorrect, illegal, and without basis. The dispute arose from the restoration of electric supply, disputed charges, and non-compliance with previous orders.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned bill was in contradiction to the order passed by the Electricity Ombudsman and contrary to previous court decisions. The court allowed the writ application, directing the Power Distribution Company to delete the demands for the disconnected period and revise the bills accordingly.
Issues: The issues revolved around the legality of charges for the disconnected period, compliance with previous orders, and the interpretation of relevant provisions of the Bihar Electricity Supply (2nd Amendment) Code, 2007.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the inconsistency of the impugned bill with the order of the Electricity Ombudsman and previous court decisions, leading to the direction for deletion of demands for the disconnected period and revision of the bills.
Final Decision: The writ application was allowed, and the Power Distribution Company was directed to delete the demands for the disconnected period and revise the bills accordingly. The court also restrained the authorities from disconnecting the electricity supply until the revised bills were issued.
Nilu Agrawal, J.
Heard Mr. Suraj Samdarshi along with Mr. Indrajesh Kumar, Advocates for the petitioner and Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh along with Mr. Vijay Kumar Verma and Akhileshwar Singh, Advocates for the respondents-North Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Power Distribution Company).
2. The petitioner in the present writ application seeks quashing of the bill dated 01.09.2017 as contained in Annexure-7 whereby an outstanding amount of Rs. 7,23,338/- has been incorporated for the disconnection period between September, 2013 to March, 2017.
3. The brief facts of the case is that the electric supply of the petitioner was energised on 03.04.2008 under High Tension Category for the purposes of cold storage in the name and style of M/s Ambika Bhawani Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. at Muzaffarpur having a contract demand of 250 KVA. The dispute arose in January, 2009 when conductor of HT line was stolen, which was restored in March, 2009, being levied charges for the disconnected period, which was disputed by the petitioner and again energy supply was disconnected from 30.03.2009 till 26.02.2010 wherein a dispute arose regarding minimum guarantee charges which had been levied and the petitioner disputed the said charges by virtue of Industrial Incentive Policy, 2006. The said dispute was ventilated before the CRGF, Muzaffarpur which passed order dated 13.12.2013 disallowing the claim of the petitioner of waiving of DPS. The matter went in appeal before the Electricity Ombudsman in Appeal No. 01/2014, which by order dated 09.05.2014 set aside the order of the CGRF, Muzaffarpur setting aside the energy bills raised between 07.04.2008 to 02.02.2011 and other bills which included wrong arrears subsequent to 02.02.2011 and direction was to issue fresh bill giving exemption in electricity duty and waiving of MMG from 07.04.2008 and discounting of DPS. The disputed bills were before the CGRF and the Ombudsman for an amount of Rs. 51,23,731/- showing arrears of Rs. 44,30,951/- vide bill dated 13.08.2011 as contained in Annexure-2. The order of the Electricity Ombudsman dated 09.05.2014, passed in Appeal No. 01/2014 having not been complied with, the petitioner moved this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 20851 of 2014 for implementation of the order dated 09.05.2014, Annexure-1 and this Court vide its order dated 19.05.2017 (Annexure-4) directed the petitioner to appear before the Chief Engineer (Commercial), North Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited, who would issue the corrected bills after resolving the dispute.
4. It may be noted that in pursuance to the interim order passed by this Court dated 17.03.2017 in the earlier writ application, a bank draft of Rs. 10 lakhs was deposited and on the direction of this Court the disputed bill was revised to Rs. 35,16,116/-. During pendency of the writ application a communication thereof was sent to the petitioner vide letter dated 15.04.2017 from April, 2008 to February, 2013 which also reflected the DPS charge for the disconnected period. But the said bills were directed to be re-examined by this Court vide order dated 19.05.2017 as contained in Annexure-4. In compliance to the order dated 19.05.2017, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 20851 of 2014 Power Distribution Company then sent a revised bill dated 01.09.2017 of Rs. 12,77,324 in which arrears of energy of Rs. 7,23,338/-, which is actually charges for the disconnected period between September 2013 to March, 2017, had been incorporated which has been challenged by the learned counsel for the petitioner as being incorrect, illegal and without any basis and in the teeth of the order passed by the Electricity Ombudsman.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bill dated 16.08.2017 contained in Annexure-5/A shows the statement of impugned bill charged from September, 2013 to June, 2017 and Annexure-5B Item-2 shows charges from September, 2013 to March, 2017 (disconnected period) to the tune of Rs. 7,23,338/-, whic
