##PAGE1##

29.12.2025

Item No.03

P

Ct. No.7

WPA 27021 of 2025

Krishna Bhunia

Versus

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Koushik De

Mr. Chitrak Biswas……..for the petitioner

Dr. Madhusudan Saha Roy…..for the WBSEDCL

Mr. Vijay Agarwal

Mr. Somraj Dhar

Ms. Sabnam De Bardhan

Mr. Soumyajit Ghosh……..for the State

1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on

record.

2. On the prayer of Mr. De, learned advocate for the

petitioner, leave is granted to the petitioner to file the

supplementary affidavit.

3. The supplementary affidavit filed in Court today is

taken on record. Copies of the supplementary affidavit

have been served upon the learned advocate for the

licensing company as well as the learned advocate for

the State.

4. The petitioner, who claims to be a cultivator, was

enjoying supply of electricity through a meter standing

in the name of his father being Meter No. GX066953.

5. The petitioner alleges that the supply of electricity

through the said meter was illegally disconnected on

November 7, 2025. Subsequently, the provisional

assessment order dated November 18, 2025 was

2

passed. The petitioner has challenged the entire action

of disconnection as well as the provisional order of

assessment in this writ petition.

6. Mr. De, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner

submits that the supply of electricity through the said

meter was disconnected on November 7, 2025, as would

be evident from the documents annexed to the

supplementary affidavit, but the meter reading was

taken on December 5, 2025. He submits that the meter

reading after the disconnection of the supply through

the meter could not have been recorded.

7. Mr. De further submits that though the outstanding

amount as indicated in the bill dated December 15,

2025 is Rs. 26,355/- but in the provisional order of

assessment, the demand raised was Rs. 1,75,001/-.

8. Learned senior advocate appearing for the licensing

company submits that in the meantime, the final

assessment order has been passed on December 10,

2025 and the copy of such assessment order has been

duly served upon the petitioner.

9. He further submits that the final order of assessment is

an appealable order under the provisions of Section 127

of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short ‘2003 Act’).

10. The State is represented by Mr. Vijay Agarwal,

learned advocate.

11. On a query of Court, Mr. De learned advocate

appearing for the petitioner submits that since the

3

provisional order of assessment was challenged in this

writ petition, objection thereto was not filed. As the writ

petition was pending, the petitioner also did not

participate in the final assessment proceedings before

the competent authority.

12. However, since the final order of assessment has

been passed and the said order is appealable one under

the provisions of Section 127 of the 2003 Act, this

Court is not inclined to interfere with such order at this

stage.Faced with such situation, Mr. De prays that the

petitioner may be given liberty to prefer an appeal

against the Final Assessment Order.

13. In view thereof, WPA 27021 of 2025 stands disposed

of by giving liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal

against the final order of assessment dated December

10, 2025 before the Appellate Authority on or before

January 6, 2026 upon compliance of the formalities as

provided under section 127(2) of the 2003 Act.

14. If the said appeal is preferred within the time limit

mentioned hereinbefore, the competent authority shall

dispose of the appeal on merits as expeditiously as

possible but positively on or before January 20, 2026.

15. Since the final order of assessment was passed

during the pendency of this writ petition, petitioner will

be at liberty to take all points in the appeal filed against

the final order of assessment.

4

16. It will also be open to the petitioner to pray for re-

connection of the supply before the competent

authority. If such a prayer is made, such authority

shall consider the same and dispose of such prayer in

accordance with law.

17. Since no affidavits have been call