Hon’ble V.K. Mathur, J.—We have heard Shri Govind Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Mridul Tripathi representing respondent Nos. 1 to 6.

2. Facts of the case stated in brief are that the petitioner is carrying on business of repairing of pumps and diesel generating sets and had obtained commercial electricity connection No. CNO/5083/011552 from respondents and was regularly depositing bills. An inspection was made by respondent Nos. 4 to 6 on 30.3.2008 in his premises. It is alleged that though the Inspecting Authority did not find any irregularity with regard to use of the electricity by the petitioner, however, respondent Nos. 4 & 5, who were annoyed because the petitioner had not succumbed to their earlier illegal demands, recorded incorrect conclusion in the inspection memo and noted an estimated amount of Rs. 1,40,000/- which the petitioner allegedly had paid lessor to the actual consumption and also imposed Rs. 2,80,000/- penalty upon the petitioner and further demanded reply within 24 hours on 31.3.2008. The petitioner has stated that he never misused or stole the electricity at any point of time, therefore, in order to apprise the correct facts he