( 1 ) BY filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-Company has challenged the order dated 25/10/2001, passed by the Appellate Committee of the Gujarat Electricity Board, respondent No. 1 herein, in Appeal No. A-82/2001. By the impugned order, the Appellate Committee has partly allowed the Appeal of the present petitioner and the said order of the Appellate Committee is the subject matter of challenge in this petition.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is a Limited Company and is a high tension consumer of the Gujarat Electricity Board, having its contract demand of 2000 KVA. On 2. 5. 2001, on behalf of the respondents, a Trivecto meter was installed at the electricity installation of the petitioner. The electricity installation of the petitioner was thereafter checked by the Industrial Checking Squad, which is specially constituted by the Board for the purpose of detection of theft and pilferage of electricity energy. Initially, the checking squad of the Board inspected the premises of the petitioner-Company and at that time, no irregularity was found. On 9. 9. 2001, in the early morning, at about 5. 00 a. m. , the Vigilance Checking Squad of the respondent-Board checked the electricity installation of the petitioner-Company. A detailed inspection was carried out at that time. Subsequently, on 1 3/09/2001, the Executive Engineer, (Industrial Division), respondent No. 2, disconnected the electricity supply and removed the meter and prepared a Panchnama and, subsequently, supplementary bill for a sum of Rs. 9,70,80,525. 35 ps. was served to the Company. The petitioner thereafter preferred an appeal before the Appellate Committee. The Appellate Committee, after hearing the petitioner as well as the Officers of the Board, partly allowed the said appeal of the petitioner. So far as the theft of electricity energy is concerned, the Appellate Committee found that the petitioner has committed such theft / pilferage of electricity energy. However, the Appellate Committee reduced the amount to Rs. 3,56,58,263. 05 Ps. Initially, at the time when the petitioner was served with a supplementary bill of Rs. 9,70,80,525. 35 ps. , the petitioner challenged the said bill by way of filing a civil suit, being Special Civil Suit No. 214 of 2001, for a declaration that the action of the Board in issuing the said bill is illegal and null and void. The petitioner also prayed for an interim injunction against disconnection. The trial court rejected the application Exhibit 5 by its order dated 9th October, 2001. At the time of deciding the application for interim injunction at Exhibit 5, the trial court held that there was no prima facie case at all in favour of the plaintiff and that the balance of convenience was also not in favour of the plaintiff. Subsequently, in view of the order of the Appellate Committee, which was passed on 25/10/2001, the said suit was withdrawn and, ultimately, the order of the Appellate Committee is challenged in the present Special Civil Application.

( 3 ) THE petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order of the Appellate Committee on various grounds and has annexed voluminous documentary evidence along with the petition. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the order of the appellate Committee, by which it is found that the petitioner is guilty of theft of electricity energy is not in accordance with law and that there is no reliable evidence for coming to the conclusion that the petitioner is guilty of committing theft of electricity energy. In order to substantiate the aforesaid contention, heavy reliance is placed on the earlier inspection carried out by the Officers of the Board, as, on the earlier occasion, during inspection, nothing objectionable was found. So far as the finding about theft is concerned, it is submitted by the petitioner that it is a case of "no Evidence" worth the name. Accordingly, it is prayed that the finding of fact about theft is perve