G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J.—The petitioner has filed the Writ petition for the following reliefs:—

“(i) For quashing of that part of the Provisional Bill for the month October issued on 4th November 2008 (Annexure- 11) by which the Respondents have arbitrarily raised a demand of arrears of Delayed Payment Surcharge [Delayed Payment Surcharge] from the Petitioner as being wholly illegal, without jurisdiction;

(ii) For restraining the Respondents from taking any coercive measure including the connection of Electricity Line of the Petitioner for recovery of the arrears of payment of Delayed Payment Surcharge as the demand was neither legal nor justified;

(iii) For a direction to the Respondents to accept the Current Monthly Bill and not to insist for payment of any further installment of the Delayed Payment Surcharge as demanded by the Respondents;

(iv) For a direction to the Respondents to rectify the Bill of Delayed Payment Surcharge [Delayed Payment Surcharge] on all the issue like Fuel Surcharge, Annual Minimum Guarantee etc. and to settle the matter on this issue without any further delay; and for any other relief(s) for which the Petitioner may legally be found entitled to in the facts & circumstances of the present case.

(v) For quashing of the order dated 28.1.2013 passed by the Financial Controller - Revenue by which he has rejected the Representation for Waiver of Delayed Payment Surcharge charges on Fuel Surcharge, claim related to Delayed Payment Surcharge on AMG Bills and claim related to Waiver of Delayed Payment Surcharge under OTS Scheme, 2006, as being wholly illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and hence liable to be quashed.

(vi) For a direction to the Respondent Board to delete the Delayed Payment Surcharge charges on the A.M.G. bills as subsequently the AMG bills were found to be incorrect and rectified and, therefore, no Delayed Payment Surcharge could have been charged on that.”

2. It is relevant to mention here that the petitioner had filed I.A. No. 1636 of 2013 for amendment in the main Writ application to amend the prayer portion in paragraph 1 by additional relief Nos. V and VI, which was allowed by this Court by order dated 14.03.2013.

3. The brief facts culled out of the petition are that the petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is a consumer of Respondent Company bearing Consumer No. 182516 HT having a Contract Demand of 1000 KVA for Rolling Mill Unit at Phulwarisharif, Khagaul, Patna. Respondent No. 1 is a Power Distribution Company, erstwhile known as Bihar State Electricity Board, indulging in selling of power as licensee. At the outset the Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present case only two issues are involved, i.e., (I) levy of Delayed Payment Surcharge on payment of Fuel Surcharge by way of interest and (ii) levy of Delayed Payment Surcharge on the amount of minimum guarantee bill which was subject matter of adjudication under Clause 13 of the Agreement.

4. The petitioner’s grievance is that the respondent company had increased the fuel surcharge by charging interest, which resulted in an enhanced fuel surcharge liability for the petitioner. The respondent company raised a fuel surcharge bill dated 21.09.2000 for Rs. 30,52,628/- for the period from April 1995 to July 2000.

5. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the respondents allowed all Industrial Consumers to make the payment of the fuel surcharge in 10 installments, starting from November 2000 to September 2001. Each installment was for Rs. 3.05 lakhs, and the petitioner paid all the installments. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner did not pay the Delayed Payment Surcharge for the 10-month period, during which the payments were made in installments. The amount of Delayed Payment Surcharge was not specified by the respondent company, but was included in the regular bill and remained pending. Thereafter, considering the issue, the Board/Company de