The court affirmed that unauthorized use of electricity can be assessed under Section 126 even when theft is alleged, highlighting the distinction between Sections 126 and 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

Heard Mr. B. K. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. K. P. Pathak, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1 to 6.

2. The petitioner herein has assailed the Inspection Report dated 01.10.2021, the seizure list dated 01.10.2021 and the FIR dated 08.12.2021.

The petitioner further has challenged the order dated 29.04.2022 passed by the learned Appellate Authority for Assam Power Distribution Company Limited (APDCL) as well as the order dated 15.06.2022 passed by the learned Appellate Authority for APDCL in Review Petition filed by the AGM, IRCA, Cachar against the order dated 29.04.2022. The petitioner further has sought for refund of the electricity bill amounting to Rs.76,45,218/-.

3. For deciding as to whether the petitioner herein is entitled to the reliefs as have been sought for in the present petition, this Court finds it pertinent to take note of the brief facts which led to the filing of the present writ petition.

MATERIAL FACTS:

4. The Petitioner herein is engaged in the business of manufacturing of M.S. ingots. For that purpose, the Petitioner had taken an electricity connection from the Respondent APDCL and the petitioner was allotted a Consumer No.152010060553 with a sanction load of 3400 KW. On 01.10.2021, an inspection was carried out in the factory premises of the petitioner. It is the claim of the petitioner that during the inspection carried out, the seals fixed on the meter and the 33KV CT-PT was found intact. However, certain items were seized from the premises of the petitioner without assigning any reason for such seizure, and thereupon, a seizure report dated 01.10.2021 was prepared by the inspection team and the petitioner alleged that the said seizure report was prepared without allowing any personnel of the petitioner to be present at the site to record objection and in absence of at least two local witnesses which is mandatory.

5. It is the further case of the petitioner that on 08.12.2021, a provisional assessment bill was provided to the petitioner for the period from 01.10.2020 to 30.09.2021 for an amount of Rs.76,45,218.55p. The petitioner was asked to submit objection within 15 days against the provisional bill. The said provisional assessment bill dated 08.12.2021 however was cancelled by a communication dated 09.12.2021 and the same was communicated through a letter issued by the Assistant GM, IRCA, Cachar Division. Another provisional assessment bill dated 08.12.2021 was forwarded to the Petitioner. On 08.12.2021, an FIR was filed by the Respondent APDCL alleging theft of electricity before the Udorbond Police Station.

6. The Petitioner has alleged that the Respondent APDCL further forced the petitioner to make the payment of an amount of Rs.76,45,218/- which the Petitioner duly paid on 10.12.2021 (under protest).

7. The Petitioner submitted its Objection against the provisional assessment bill dated 10.12.2021. The Respondent APDCL upon submission of the objection to the provisional assessment bill, carried out hearing on 21.12.2021 and a Speaking Order was passed on 29.12.2021 wherein it was mentioned that the petitioner had indulged in theft of electricity by tampering/interfering the meter system and should be booked under Section 135 of the ELECTRICITY ACT , 2003 (for short, “the Act of 2003”).

8. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an Appeal against the Speaking Order dated 29.12.2021 before the Appellate Authority under Section 127 of the Act of 2003. The Appeal was registered as Appeal No.1/2022. The learned Appellate Authority vide an order dated 29.04.2022, disposed of the said Appeal, observing