P. R. GOKULAKRISHNAN, J.

( 1 ) THIS Special Civil Application has been filed for the following reliefs: (A) To issue an appropriate writ order or direction quashing and setting aside the order and bill dated 22-12-1986 issued by the respondent No. 2 as per Annexure C as unconstitutional illegal null and void. (B) To issue an appropriate writ order or direction holding and declaring that the conditions Nos. 34 and 35 and such other conditions dealing with the matters of assessment of energy supply in the case of malpractice and dishonest use and disconnection of power supply etc. and such other conditions prescribed by the respondent No. 1 for supply of electrical energy in exercise of the power conferred on it by sec. 49 of the Electricity (Supply) Act 1948 are invalid unconstitutional and ultra vires conditions and to strike down the said conditions prescribed by the respondent No. 1 as such.

( 2 ) FOR the purpose of the disposal of this case it is unnecessary for us to elaborately refer to the facts of this case. Suffice it to say that there is a contractual obligation between the petitioner and the respondent-Board in respect of supply of electricity to the petitioner herein. Conditions 34 and 35 which are being questioned as ultra vires the Constitutions and arbitrary are conditions to which the petitioner is a party. It is the definite case of the respondent-Electricity Board that the petitioner by inserting a plastic material stopped the functioning of the meter and thereby committed theft of electricity. The power supply was disconnected as early as 11-12-1986. It is also the say of the Electricity Board through its counsel that this is the second occasion on which the petitioner has committed the theft of electricity.

( 3 ) THE third occasion of electricity theft was also found out and a notice has also been issued by the respondents herein. The question whether such act was committed by the petitioner or not is a disputed question of fact which cannot be decided in this Special Civil Application. As a matter of fact it is admitted by the petitioner that he actually filed a suit and also prayed for an injunction therein but subsequently after the trial Court has vacated the injunction it already granted he has withdrawn that suit and has come forward with the present Special Civil Application. Thus we are of the view that we cannot go into the factual questions that arise in this case regarding the theft of electricity etc. and the petitioner has efficient and efficacious remedy by way of a suit to agitate such matters. When the counsel for the petitioner is confronted with this observation of this Court he confined his argument Only to Condition No. 34 of the conditions of supply of electricity by the Board to the petitioner. Condition No. 34 for the purpose of this case is extracted in part. They are to the following effect:34 Payment for energy dishonestly used abstracted or maliciously wasted or diverted. Where it is established to the satisfaction of the Boards officer that a consumer has dishonestly abstracted used consumed or maliciously caused energy to be wasted or diverted the value of the electrical energy thus abstracted used consumed wasted or diverted shall be assessed by such officer for the past six months period or the actual period from the date of commencement of supply whichever is less in the manner specified hereinbelow and the value of energy so assessed shall be collected by including the same in the next bill or by a separate bill. Such amount shall always be deemed to be the arrears of electricity dues for all purposes. Provided that the value of the electricity energy so assessed to have been abstracted used consumed wasted or diverted shall be subject to review by the Appellate Authority on the representation/appeal being filed by the consumer in the manner stated hereinbelow. When a consumer on first occasion is found wasting/directly using/abstracting/ consuming energy dishonestly or malici

Click Here to Read the rest of this document