JUDGMENT :

HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.

1. Since common issue is involved in the captioned writ petitions, the same are heard analogously and are being decided by this common judgment.

2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned counsel Ms. Lilu K. Bhaya, waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Vaibhav Sharma, waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.2.

3. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the petitions have been taken up for final hearing today.

4. By way of present petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter be referred to as “the Act”), the respective petitioners have challenged the order dated 15.12.2021 passed by the respondent No.2 – Chief Electrical Inspector and Appellate Authority, Gandhinagar (hereinafter be referred to as “the Appellate Authority”) in Appeal No. 1 of 2021 pursuant to the remand application heard by the respondent No.2 in furtherance of the order dated 24.11.2021 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 874 of 2021. By virtue of the impugned order dated 15.12.2021, the learned Appellate Authority has directed the respondent No.1 herein to recalculate the final assessment bill for unauthorized use of electricity at twice the rate and deduct the charges already recovered therefor from the present petitioner during the period of assessment. It was also directed that the amount deposited by the present petitioner be adjusted / refunded against the bill so recalculated.

5. In view of the fact that Special Civil Application No. 13053 of 2024 is treated as lead matter, facts mentioned in the said Special Civil Application are considered. It is the case of the petitioner that, the Petitioner had established its manufacturing unit in Shed No.2 of Ashish Industrial Compound and for expansion of their business, the petitioner set-up an additional manufacturing unit adjoining to the existing facility by taking on lease the shed admeasuring 702 sq. mtrs. of Aarcee Precision Casting Pvt. Ltd. That, for the purpose of catering to the power requirements of the new unit, the petitioner vide its letter dated 16.04.2010 informed PGVCL that it had taken on lease the adjoining shed and requested to consider both sheds as their premises. It was also mentioned in the said letter that the petitioner would obtain the wiring approved by the Electrical Inspector. That, the PGVCL replied to the aforesaid letter asking the petitioner to furnish the ownership documents of the shed of Aarcee Precision Casting Pvt. Ltd. within 10 days and in response to the same, the petitioner provided the required ownership documents to the PGVCL. That, the PGVCL replied to the above letter, inter alia, informing that upon perusal of the documents it is found that the premises which is sought to be amalgamated/merged has been granted on special conditions for a different purpose and on a different survey number and that in no circumstances the said premises can be amalgamated/merged with the existing premises. It was further mentioned in the above letter that it was a case of breach of conditions of grant of land and that therefore, as per the rules and regulations of the PGVCL the application of the petitioner is rejected. That, in response to the above, the petitioner replied vide a letter informing, inter alia, that the adjoining land of Aarcee Precision Casting Pvt. Ltd. was also granted for Industrial purpose and that there is no case of breach of conditions.

5.1 It is further the case of the petitioner that, the PGVCL vide letter dated 17.09.2010 informed the petitioner that apropos to the Development Permission granted by Rajkot Urban Development Authority, as per the Special Condition No.3, the petitioner was required to produce a "No Objection Certificate” from Rajkot Urban Development Authorit