The Electricity Board cannot prepare a supplementary bill based on calculations other than the meter reading without referring the dispute to the Electrical Inspector for determination.

( 1 ) THE petitioner Basantibai is the proprietor of Santosh Industries, D-11 B. C. Sector, Saver Road, Indore. She had obtained the service connection No. 192352 of 30 H. P. load for running an oil-mill. The Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board (respondent 1) who is a licensee, had installed a meter for ascertaining the amount of energy supplied and consumed by the petitioner under the aforesaid service connection. The meter so installed is the property of respondent 1.

( 2 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner on 18-2-1983 the meter got burnt and this fact was immediately reported to the respondent 4 an Assistant Engineer of the Zone in which the petitioner Industry is situated. On 1-3-1983 the petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 433/- as the price of the meter and Rs. 44/- as connection charges. The petitioner deposited the aforesaid amounts on the same day. However, the respondent-Board failed to restore the electric connection by installing another meter even after the aforesaid deposit made by the petitioner, who on 5-3-1983, vide notice Annex-D called upon the respondents to restore the electric connection by installing another meter. However instead of restoring the electric connection the respondent 4 through a registered letter dt. 4-3-1983 Annexure-E called upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 12,346. 10 paise as per the supplementary bill dt. 2-3-1983 Annexure F. The basis of the supplementary bill was that the meter was not recording the actual energy supplied and consumed as it was found that one phase was not working and the meter was running on two phases only. The petitioner was also informed that in case of non-compliance the electric supply would be cut off.

( 3 ) THE petitioner by this petition challenges the letter dt. 4-3-1983 (Annex. E) and the supplementary bill dt. 2-3-1983 (Annex. F) as according to her this demand is illegal.

( 4 ) THE respondents' case, as it emerges from the return, is that on 17-2-1983 the power connection was checked and it was found that out of three phases, one phase was not working. The body seal was found to be intact. It is contended that the consumer was informed that his bills would be revised in view of the non-working of one phase as found at the time of checking. The respondents have denied that the meter got burnt on 18-2-1983. On the other hand, it is their charge that the petitioner or her associates burnt the meter, which according to the respondents ordinarily would not burn. The respondents further contend that on 19-2-1983 a checking party was sent for checking the meter, which was removed in the presence of the petitioner's husband and the meter reading was also done in his presence, which was 29929. It is alleged that the body seals of the meter were broken. According to the respondents this tampering of seals prima facie appears to have been done between 17th and 19th Feb. 1983 and it is their imputation that in order to avoid any liability, which would have accrued for rebilling, the meter itself was burnt. The respondents allege that the petitioner's husband refused to sign the Panchnama, which according to respondents was prepared on the spot.

( 5 ) THE petitioner contends that the respondents in view of S. 26 (6) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as the (Act)) and the rules cannot revise or prepare a supplementary bill and compel the petitioner to pay the same before restoring the electric supply. Such a payment cannot be made a condition precedent for restoring the electric supply. The respondents on the other hand contend that as one of the phases was not working, it is apparent that one third of the total actual consumption by the petitioner could not be recorded and as such the respondent Board was justified in preparing a supplementary bill on the basis of average billing, recalculating the same and adding one-third to it on account of non-recording of the meter from the period commencing with the date of