Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Since pleadings are complete, as requested and agreed by learned counsel for the parties, this Court proceed to decide the matter finally under the Rules of the Court at this stage.

2. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 14.3.2011 passed by Commissioner, Allahabad Division Allahabad rejecting petitioner’s appeal on the ground that he has not paid 1/3rd of the amount of assessment as contemplated under Section 127(2) of Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as “Act 2003”) and hence appeal was not maintainable without complying with the aforesaid condition precedent.

3. The petitioner got an electric connection of 30 HP for the purpose of its commercial and small scale undertaking namely manufacturing and multi colour printing etc. A checking was made at petitioner’s premises on 3.1.2002. The petitioner was found using excess load i.e. load more than the sanctioned load. An assessment was made by Executive Engineer, Electricity Urban Distribution Division, Mayohall, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as “EEMH”) vide assessment order dated 3.4.2002 for a total sum of Rs.1,75,500/-.

4. The petitioner made representation thereagainst and while awaiting decision on the part of EEMH, another checking was made on 29.10.2002 and there again the checking team reported excess load at petitioner’s premises. The petitioner made complaint against this checking. In the meantime an assessment order/bill dated 13.12.2002 was issued by EEMH for a sum of Rs.795278.52 with regard to second checking.

5. Against the assessment bill dated 13.12.2002, petitioner filed an appeal before appellate committee vide memo of appeal dated 11.8.2003. It appears that aforesaid appeal was subsequently transferred to Commissioner, Allahabad in 2008 where it was registered as Appeal No. 3 of 2008-09. This exercise was undertaken, purported to be, under Section 127 of Act 2003. From the appellate order dated 7.10.2010, impugned in this writ petition, it is evident that aforesaid appeal was transmitted to Commissioner on 2.12.2008 by respondents-electricity supplier. The Commissioner passed an order on 7.10.2010 holding that 1/3rd amount of assessment having not been deposited by petitioner, as provided in Section 127(2), hence appeal was not maintainable. The petitioner then filed a review application which was also rejected by order dated 14.3.2011.

6. It has been stated by petitioner that his appeal was already decided by appellate committee in its meeting dated 16.10.2004 but copy of appellate order was not served upon him. The respondents, in an illegal manner, treated the appeal pending and thereafter transmitted the record to Commissioner which itself was illegal. A copy of minutes of appellate Committee’s meeting dated 16.10.2004 has been placed on record as Annexure 17 to the writ petition.

7. On behalf of respondents, a counter-affidavit has been filed by respondent No. 2. The other facts are not disputed but in reply to the petitioner’s averment made in para 11 to the writ petition that his appeal was already decided by appellate committee in its meeting dated 16.10.2004 but copy of the order was not made available to him. Respondents have taken a stand in para 6 of the counter-affidavit that since petitioner did not deposit 1/3rd of assessment amount alongwith appeal, his appeal was not decided by Committee and after notification issued under Act 2003 constituting appellate committee consisting of Commissioner of Division, record in original was transmitted to Commissioner who has rightly rejected appeal for failure on the part of petitioner to deposit 1/3rd of assessment amount.

8. Heard Sri B.C. Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajeev Sharma, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and perused the record.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that assessment proceedings having been initiated in 2002, Act 2003 would not apply and right of appeal to the petitione