1996 Supreme(Cal) 170

High Court Of Calcutta
S. B. SINHA
SRI HANUMAN STEEL ROLLING MILL - Appellant
Versus
C.E.S.C.LTD. - Respondent
Matter 129  Of  1993
Decided On : 04/12/1996

Headnote:

INDIAN ELECTRICITY ACT, 1910 - Ss. 24, 26, 26(4), 26(6), 39, 42, 44 - ELECTRICITY (SUPPLY) ACT, 1948 - Ss. 49(1), 79(1) - ELECTRICITY (SUPPLY) REGULATIONS, 1994 - R. 22A - SALE OF GOODS ACT, 1930 - Ss. 148, 193, 154 - INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 - Ss. 97, 99 - CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 - Art. 12, 311(2) - PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE - DISCONNECTION OF ELECTRICITY - CONDITIONS PRECEDENT - NOTICE - OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING - ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES - JURISDICTION OF CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR - HELD, principles of natural justice are required to be complied with before disconnecting the electrical energy for any reasons whatsoever inasmuch by reason thereof the consumers suffer civil consequences. The extent and the stage of such opportunity shall, however, vary from case to case. The question as regards the applicability of the principles of natural justice has to be viewed in the context of the Respondents' own case that they have been exercising their power of disconnection of electrical energy in terms of paragraph VI of the Schedule appended to the Act. The contention of the respondents that they have such power by way of private defence or under the contract of bailment has thus to be rejected. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the respondents cannot be a Judge of their own cause is treated to be rejected. The respondents have been acting on the basis of the power conferred upon them under the statute and when they do so, the question of their becoming Judge of their own cause does not arise. It is, thus, evident that principles of natural justice are required to be read into the provisions of the statutes. A person cannot be deprived of the basic amenities like supply of electrical energy without any authority of law. The question as to whether such disruption or discontinuance of supply of electrical energy on the part of the authorities of the licensee and/or board is reasonable or not must be decided by the competent authorities at the first instance. Such an action cannot be taken on the basis of pure subjective satisfaction. Such a drastic action can be taken only on objective factors and thus in my opinion, it is necessary to comply with the minimum requirement of the principles of natural justice.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners were consumers of electrical energy having obtained electrical connection from the respondent-company but their electrical connection had been disconnected on diverse dates by the Officers of Loss Control Cell of C. E. S. C. Ltd. upon surprise inspections and having allegedly found that the petitioners have indulged in theft or pilferage of electrical energy. In some matters, affidavits-in-opposition have been filed by the C. E. S. C. Ltd. where in almost stereo type statements have been made that upon inspection the meter body of the meter installed in the premises of the consumers were found spurious and/or the seals of the service cut out were found missing or the seals on the meter body were found tampered. In almost all the cases the petitioners carry on business or trades and their grievance is that by reason of an arbitrary action on the part of the C. E. S. C. Ltd. and its officers in disconnecting the electrical energy they have suffered immense loss and injury. In some of the writ applications it has specifically been averred that the officers of C. E. S. C. Ltd. sought for illegal gratification from them but on their refusal to pay the same, the electrical connections had been disconnected and false First Information Reports have been lodged. It is stated that thereafter the C. E. S. C. Ltd. had sent a bill and in the cases where the consumers having no other alternative had paid the amount and approached this Court and obtained an interim order, no further action has been taken by the Respondents. It also appears from the records that in some of the cases despite liberty granted to C. E. S. C. Ltd. to take off the meter from the premises of the consumer no such action had been taken and supply of electrical energy was continued through the old meter without taking any corrective measure or without sending the meter to the Chief Electrical Inspector for his examination in terms of Section 26 (6) of the Indian Electricity Act. Moreover the criminal cases were also not proceeded with. It was, therefore, contended that the plea of theft or pilferage of electrical energy in most of the cases is merely a ruse or a ploy to extract a huge amount from the consumer without any authority of law in an arbitrary manner which is violative of the provisions of Indian Electricity Act and the rules framed thereunder.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that principles of natural justice are required to be complied with before disconnecting the electrical energy for any reasons whatsoever inasmuch by reason thereof the consumers suffer civil consequences. The extent and the stage of such opportunity shall, however, vary from case to case. The question as regards the applicability of the principles of natural justice has to be viewed in the context of the Respondents' own case that they have been exercising their power of disconnection of electrical energy in terms of paragraph VI of the Schedule appended to the Act. The contention of the respondents that they have such power by way of private defence or under the contract of bailment has thus to be rejected. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the respondents cannot be a Judge of their own cause is treated to be rejected. The respondents have been acting on the basis of the power conferred upon them under the statute and when they do so, the question of their becoming Judge of their own cause does not arise. It is, thus, evident that principles of natural justice are required to be read into the provisions of the statutes. A person cannot be deprived of the basic amenities like supply of electrical energy without any authority of law. The question as to whether such disruption or discontinuance of supply of electrical energy on the part of the authorities of the licensee and/or board is reasonable or not must be decided by the competent authorities at the first instance. Such an action cannot be taken on the basis of pure subjective satisfaction. Such a drastic action can be taken only on objective factors and thus in my opinion, it is necessary to comply with the minimum requirement of the principles of natural justice.

Issues: Whether principles of natural justice are required to be complied with before disconnecting the electrical energy for any reasons whatsoever inasmuch by reason thereof the consumers suffer civil consequences.

Ratio Decidendi: Principles of natural justice are required to be complied with before disconnecting the electrical energy for any reasons whatsoever inasmuch by reason thereof the consumers suffer civil consequences. The extent and the stage of such opportunity shall, however, vary from case to case. The question as regards the applicability of the principles of natural justice has to be viewed in the context of the Respondents' own case that they have been exercising their power of disconnection of electrical energy in terms of paragraph VI of the Schedule appended to the Act. The contention of the respondents that they have such power by way of private defence or under the contract of bailment has thus to be rejected. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the respondents cannot be a Judge of their own cause is treated to be rejected. The respondents have been acting on the basis of the power conferred upon them under the statute and when they do so, the question of their becoming Judge of their own cause does not arise. It is, thus, evident that principles of natural justice are required to be read into the provisions of the statutes. A person cannot be deprived of the basic amenities like supply of electrical energy without any authority of law. The question as to whether such disruption or discontinuance of supply of electrical energy on the part of the authorities of the licensee and/or board is reasonable or not must be decided by the competent authorities at the first instance. Such an action cannot be taken on the basis of pure subjective satisfaction. Such a drastic action can be taken only on objective factors and thus in my opinion, it is necessary to comply with the minimum requirement of the principles of natural justice.

Final Decision: The Court allowed the applications and directed the respondents to give a post-decisional hearing to the petitioners in view of the decisions of Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi's case, (AIR 1978 SC 596) (supra ). However, in future it is expected that they would abide by the law. These applications are, therefore, disposed of with the aforementioned directions and observations but in the facts and circumstances of these cases, there will be no order as to costs.