Back
2022 Supreme(Gau) 797
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.
M/S. S.M. CEMENT INDUSTRIES – Petitioner
Versus
ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 5892 of 2017
Decided On : 01-11-2022
Important Points
Subject
Electricity Theft - Assessment of Electricity Loss
Act Referred
Headnote
Theft of Electricity - Tempering Meter - Meter was sent for appropriate inspection - It is conclusion of respondents in APDCL that it is a clear case of theft of electricity by tempering meter – Assessed quantity of energy consumed shall be determined by taking average consumption for previous three months, preceding date on which defect was detected or next three months after correction, whichever is higher and bill be prepared. Para 16
Finding of the Court :
Court have been taken through meter testing and inspection report pertaining to meter of petitioner, which indicates that meters that were examined have observation pass - It is discernible that information which were available with respondents in APDCL of succeeding three months after correction of meter was not taken into consideration or in other words ignored, whereas incomplete information of preceding three months being information only with respect to 78 days was taken into consideration, and made basis in arriving at final bill of Rs. 2,03,13,737/ - Accordingly, as correct procedure and process was not adopted by respondents in APDCL for arriving at final bill of Rs. 2,03,13,737/- assessment to writ petition and resultant final bill at Annexure 12 Page 67 of writ petition are set aside - Petitioner may make an application before respondents in APDCL for refund of amount which has already been deposited pursuant to interim order of this Court in this writ petition and upon such application being made, respondents in APDCL shall pass a reasoned order on same.
Result: Petition partly allowed.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: S.S. KEJRIWAL.
JUDGMENT :
ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.
1. Heard Dr. A. Saraf, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S.K. Kejriwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned counsel for the respondents in the APDCL.
2. The petitioner is a consumer of electricity under the respondent APDCL and was allotted meter No. AS-897243. On 24.07.2014, the officials of the respondent APDCL detected a foreign material to have been implanted in the consumer meter of the petitioner by breaking open the seal. The meter was sent for appropriate inspection and there exists a CNRI report showing the presence of a foreign material inside the meter and that the seal of the meter was broken. On the basis of such report, it is the conclusion of the respondents in the APDCL that it is a clear case of theft of electricity by tempering the meter where the petitioner itself is the sole beneficiary. Upon the meter being detected to have been tempered, the petitioner was allotted a different meter bearing No. 897450.
3. The relevant provisions under the Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matter) Regulation, 2004 (in short AERC 2004), as amended in 2007 that are applicable when there is a un-metered use of electricity or theft of electricity is provided in clause 5.A.4.4 of the AERC 2004. Clause 5.A.4.4. is extracted below:
“5.A.4.4 Un-metered use of Electricity (Theft of Electricity):
When a consumer indulges in the theft of electricity, the officer authorised in this behalf by the Government of Assam may without prejudice to its other right, will assess the quantum of electricity loss on the basis of assessed consumption of detected category as per Table under 6.2.1.1 and connected load for a period of twelve months prior to the date of detection and will be billed at the rate of 2 times of the existing tariff.”
4. A reading of clause 5.A.4.4 makes it discernible that when a consumer indulges in theft of electricity, the officer authorized on behalf of the Government of Assam may without prejudice to its other rights, asses the quantum of electricity loss as per table provided in clause 6.2.1.1 and the connected load for a period of 12 months prior to the date of detection will be billed @ two times of the existing tariff. In other words, upon un-metered use of electricity or theft of electricity being detected, the respondents in the APDCL are required to make an assessment as per the table in clause 6.2.1.1. Clause 6.2.1.1 providing for computation of load security and the table thereof is extracted as below:
“6.2.1.1 Computation of load Security
The security deposit amount required to be maintained with the Licensee will be computed as follows:
A sum equal to two months charges (energy charge + fixed/demand charge) calculated in prevailing tariff at monthly average consumption of last financial year.
The new consumers shall pay on initial security deposit based on the table of estimated consumption category of consumers given below:
| S. No. | Category | Estimated consumption (Per kW/ Month) |
| 1 | Domestic | 60 |
| 2 | Commercial | 120 |
| 3 | General Purpose | 100 |
| 4 | Public Lighting | 300 |
| 5 | Public water works | 120 |
| 6 | Irrigation | 120 |
| 7 | Small Industry-Rural and Urban (connected load up to 25 kVA) |
|
|
| Rural | 50 |
|
| Urban | 100 |
| 8 | HT-I Medium Industries (connected load above 25 kVA to 100 kVA) | 100 |
| 9 | HT-II Large Industries (connected load above 100 kVA to 2500 kVA) | 150 |
| 10 | HT-II Extra Large Industries (connected load above 2500 kVA | 250 |
5. A reading of clause 6.2.1.1 goes to show that in respect of HT-II Large Industries (connected load above 100 KVA to 2500 KVA), the estimated consumption is 150 KWH.
6. When the respondent authorities made the computation in terms of the table provided in clause 6.2.1.1, the figure that was arrived happened to
