The limitation period for recovering electricity dues under Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 is two years; claims beyond this period cannot be enforced.

JUDGMENT :

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.

Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited feels aggrieved against the order dated 14.11.2018 passed by the Consumers Grievances Redressal Forum, HPSEBL, allowing the complaint preferred by the respondent. The Forum held the petitioners debarred from claiming the amount in question from the respondent. The demand notice issued by the petitioners- HPSEBL on 09.02.2018 claiming an alleged outstanding liability of Rs.2,18,400/- for the period 25.10.2010 to 25.11.2010 on account of less charging, was quashed and set-aside.

2. The case:-

2(i). A cement plant was being run by M/s Jai Prakash Associates Limited at Village Baga, P.O. Kandhar, Tehsil Arki, District Solan, H.P. with split unit for grinding of clinker in the name of M/s Japee Himachal Cement Grinding & Blending Plant at Village Pandyana Tikkri, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan. Under a scheme of merger in terms of Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act Jai Prakash Associates Limited & J.P. Cement Corporation Limited, both Public Limited Companies merged into Ultra Tech Cement Limited-respondent. The scheme of merger provided for transfer and vesting of business of Jai Prakash Associates Limited & J.P. Cement Corporation Limited as a going concern with Ultra Tech Cement Limited under an order passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Allahabad on 02.03.2017. All assets, liabilities and business of the first two companies were taken over and stood vested in the respondent company.

2.(ii). No dues certificate/no objection certificate against electricity charges upto March, 2017 was issued by the petitioners- HPSEBL in favour of the transferor companies. As per the aforesaid no objection certificate, no electricity bill charges were pending against the transferor companies till 31.03.2017.

2.(iii). Petitioners- HPSEBL on 09.02.2018 issued a notice to the transferee/ respondent company conveying that Record of Appropriations & Obligations (RAO) Audit Party had pointed out less charging of sum of Rs.2,18,400/-from the transferor companies during the period 25.10.2010 to 25.11.2010. The aforesaid amount was due and outstanding from transferor companies, therefore, transferee company i.e. the respondent is liable to pay the amount. The respondent company was directed to deposit the amount.

2(iv). In the aforesaid background, feeling aggrieved against the demand notice dated 09.02.2018 issued by the petitioners to the respondent, a complaint was preferred by the respondent before the Consumers Grievances Redressal Forum on 04.05.2018. The complaint was allowed by the Forum on 14.11.2018 as under:-

“The Forum order that the period 25.10.2010 to 25.11.2010 of less charged amount is almost eight years back so the respondent Board is debarred from claiming this amount as per Section 56 (2) of Electricity Act and the notice No. HPSEBL/JSD/A-1/2017-18-901-902 dated 09.02.2018 is quashed and set- aside.”

HPSEBL feels aggrieved against allowing of respondent’s complaint by the Consumer Forum under order dated 14.11.2018, hence, this writ petition.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file.

4. The Consumer Forum has held the petitioners to be debarred from claiming the amount from the respondent in view of Section 56 (2) of the Electricity Act. The Forum has observed that notice impugned before it claiming the amount from the respondent on account of less charged bill pertained to period 25.10.2010 to 25.11.2010. The period dated 08 years back. Therefore, in view of provisions of Section 56 , the Board could not have claimed the amount.

The respondent is stated to have deposited about 1/3rd of claimed amount with the petitioners- HPSEBL pursuant to the interim directions issued by the Forum.

4(i). Section 56 of the El