ORDER :

1. A pure question of law arises for consideration in the present case. Petitioner in the present case is aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order dated 25.11.2016 passed by the Additional Collector-cum-District Electricity Appellate Officer, Vaishali by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 2003’) has been rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is contesting the order rejecting his appeal on the grounds inter-alia that the Additional Collector, Vaishali (Respondent No. 5) cannot be said to be the competent authority to adjudicate an appeal under Section 127 of the Act of 2003 particularly in view of the provisions of the Appeal to Appellate Authority Rules, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules of 2004’) framed by the Central Government in exercise of its powers under Clause (u) of sub-section (2) of Section 176 of the Act of 2003.

3. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner when this Court found that in the counter affidavit earlier filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 to 6, there was no answer to the same, the Court passed order dated 26.06.2019 calling upon the respondent nos. 2 to 6 to supplement their counter affidavit. The order dated 26.06.2019 is quoted hereunder for ready reference:-

"The respondent nos. 2 to 6 are required to supplement their counter affidavit as they have not answered some of the relevant issues raised in the writ application which includes the issue relating to competence of the appellate authority in terms of Rule 3 of the Appellate Authority Rules, 2004. The respondents would also be required to answer as to how the case of the petitioner may be distinguished taking note of the ratio of the judgment dated 04.11.2015 passed by a learned coordinate Bench of this Court in CWJC No. 1546 of 2014, a coy of which has been annexed as Annexure-5 to the writ application.

As prayed for by Mr. Prakash Kumar, as a matter of indulgence, let this cases be listed after two weeks on 11th July, 2019 maintaining its position."

4. A supplementary counter affidavit has now been filed on behalf of the aforesaid respondents. It is contended that under the provisions of Section 127 of the Act of 2003 it has been provided that any person aggrieved by a final order made under Section 126 of the Act of 2003 may prefer an appeal to an appellate authority as may be prescribed. It is stated that in the light of the provisions of Section 127 of the Act of 2003 the Energy Department, Government of Bihar vide its notification no. 44/2003-15 issued vide Memo No. 2782 dated 28.05.2013 and constituted the appellate authority under Rule 3 of the Rules of 2004.

5. It is stated that Rule 3 of the Appellate Authority Rules, 2004 was amended by the GSR 537(e) dated 07.09.2006 with effect from 07.09.2006 to the extent that by amendment it provided for a Multi Member Appellate Authority comprising one or more persons with one person having knowledge of matters related to assessment of electricity charges and not directly related to the affairs of the territorial jurisdiction of the licensee or supplier of electricity.

6. It is submitted that in the light of the amendment brought in Rule 3 of the Rules of 2004, the Energy Department, Government of Bihar resolved to effect a modification in the earlier notification no. 15 dated 28.05.2013 to the extent of appointing and authorizing the Assistant Executive Engineer, Bihar State Power Transmission Company Ltd. (In short ‘BSPTCL’) to act and discharge all the powers and functions of member in the two Members Appellate Authority with the ADM already authorized as Chairperson to discharge his duties and jurisdiction of the Appellate Authority under Section 127 of the Act of 2003.

7. A copy of notification no. 05 dated 06.05.2016 issued by the Energy Department, Government of Bihar vide Memo No. 1488 dated 06.05.2016 has been brought on record as Annexure ‘