MAHENDRA BHUSHAN, J.—This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus or a direction or order with a prayer that the order of the respondents (Annexure-1) repeated in Annexure-5 be quashed and the non-petitioner (1) be restrained by a rule of this Court from executing the order (Annx. 3) of non-petitioner(2), and further that the non-petitioner be restrained from disconnecting the supply of energy to the petitioner so long as the petitioner makes the payment of electricity charges consumed by him.

2. M/s B.R. Oil Mills, petitioner, is a registered partnership concern carrying on business at Bharatpur and extracts oil from oil seeds by the machinery fixed in it. The petitioner is a high tension consumer of the non-petitioner (2), and he applied to the non-petitioners for providing the high tension power in the year 1962. The same was provided to the petitioner and the petitioner is regularly paying the amount as per bills for the electricity consumed by him, and it is not disputed by the non-petitioners. The petitioner furnished National Saving Certificates of the value of Rs. 5,000/- towards security for making the payment of monthly electricity bills received by him. However, the non-petitioner (1) asked the petitioner in the year 1969 by its letter dated December, 6, 1969 (Annexure-1) to deposit in cash the security equivalent to estimated consumption charges for one month amounting to Rs. 14, 557/-and further required the petitioner to furnish a bank guarantee in the sum of Rs. 29,103/- being the estimate of consumption charges for two months. There was exchange of correspondence in between the parties, and the petitioner did not deposit the cash amount and also did not furnish the bank guarantee. Thereupon, a notice (Annexure-4) was served on the petitioner calling upon him to furnish the cash security as well as bank guarantee, as aforesaid, failing which his connection was to be disconnected without any further notice. The petition was filed in this court on October 12, 1972.

3. The order of the non-petitioners has been challenged by the petitioner on the grounds, (1) that in the year 1962 when energy was supplied to the petitioner, the petitioner was required to furnish security in the form of National Saving Certificates of the value of Rs. 5,000/-, which he furnished, and, therefore, the non-petitioners cannot unilaterally now require the petitioner to furnish cash security and security in the form of bank guarantee as aforesaid; and (2) that a decision of the Board calling upon the petitioner to furnish security on 3 months estimated consumption charges (in the form of cash of one months estimated consumption charges and in the form of bank guarantee for two months estimated consumption charges) is unreasonable, more so when the petitioner never defaulted in making regular payments of the electricity consumption by him; (3) that no powers are vested in the non-petitioners u/s. 24 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1910), to disconnect the connection in case the security as desired was not furnished, because, the amount of security cannot be said to be a sum due from the petitioner to the non-petitioners, and (4) that the matter should have been referred to arbitration under S. 24 (2) of the Act of 1910, because the petitioner had raised the dispute and made the demand to refer the dispute to arbitration, as per terms of clause 30 of the agreement.

4. In reply to the writ petition, it has been submitted on behalf of the non-petitioners that under the general conditions of supply and scale of miscellaneous charges relating to the supply of electricity by the Rajasthan State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the Regulation) framed under S. 49 read with S.79 (J) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Supply Act), the petitioner was bound to furnish security under Regulation 20 of the Regulations on three m

Click Here to Read the rest of this document