The court affirmed the learned Single Judge's dismissal of the writ petition, citing the existence of an alternative remedy under the Electricity Act and adherence to Supreme Court precedents on meter tampering and assessment procedures.

JUDGMENT :

K.R. Surana, J.

Heard Mr. P.K. Sarma, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned standing counsel for the respondents.

2) This intra-court appeal is to assail the judgment and order dated 13.10.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 2608/2019, thereby dismissing the said writ petition filed by the appellant.

Appellants case in brief:

3) The appellant herein is that the appellant company has an industrial unit, having connected load of 2310 KW., drawing electricity power from the Assam Power Distribution Co. Ltd., (APDCL for short), the respondent no.1 herein. It has been projected that the APDCL had carried out usual inspection of the metering system of the appellants on 08.04.2019, but no anomalies were found. However, another inspection was carried out on 11.04.2019 at about 3.30 pm, and allegedly detected tampering of the metering system and a report to that effect was prepared on 11.04.2019. The representative of the appellants had made a remark on the inspection note to the effect that a false case was made out against them, and all seals were intact, but those seals were cut, broken and tampered by the inspecting team to frame a false case, for which there was nothing in the T&C Report or Format-16 showing any specified quantum of electricity stolen by the appellants, as required under Section 135 of the Electricity Act and that the electricity supply was illegally disconnected and that nothing was shown to as to what was tampering in the meter.

4) The appellant, by filing a writ petition, which was registered and numbered as W.P.(C) 2609/2019, amongst others, prayed for setting aside and quashing of the (i) inspection report dated 11.04.2019; (ii) seizure report dated 11.04.2019; (iii) assessment bill dated 12.04.2019, (iv) FIR dated 12.04.2019; and (iv) bill dated 20.04.2019. This Court, by an interim order dated 12.04.2019, as an interim measure, directed the respondents to restore electricity supply to the industrial unit of the appellant and also granted liberty to the respondents to continue with the proceeding following inspection and consequential seizure dated 11.04.2019.

5) The respondents filed an interlocutory application for vacating the interim order dated 11.04.2019. However, the learned Single Judge, by an order dated 07.05.2019, dismissed the said I.A.(C) No. 1445/2019 [in W.P.(C) No. 2608/2019], by holding that no case was made out for vacating the stay. The learned Single Judge, upon hearing both sides and after considering the materials available on record as well as the cases cited at the Bar, dismissed the writ petition by holding that the appellant is having an efficacious alternative remedy under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003, so far the same relates to the impugned assessment more particularly, when the Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission has already notified in the Code and in terms of the Electricity (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2005, adopting the procedure prescribed under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, so far, the same relates to assessment of charges pending determination by the Special Court exercising its power under Section 154 of the Electricity Act, 2003. However, it was provided that the determination made herein shall not influence the authorities on the merit of the inspection report and the assessment made thereof.

Submissions by the learned counsel for the appellants in support of the grounds of challenge in this appeal:

6) The learned counsel for the appellant had pressed all the 32 (thirty two) grounds on which this appeal is preferred.

7) The gist of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant can be summarized as follows:-

a. It was submitted that the note made by the Factory Manager clearly reflected that there was no anomaly in the metering system, but with some mala fide intention, the inspection team had broken the seals and thus, tampered with the metering system.

b. Elaborate techn