IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT INDORE

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI

th

ON THE 12 OF JANUARY, 2026

WRIT PETITION No. 49817 of 2025

M/S S.M. PLASTICS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR SHIKA TATERH

Versus

MADHYA PRADESH KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAN CO. LTD. AND

OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Apoorv Kumar Sahu - Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Yogesh Hemnani - Advocate for the respondents.

ORDER documents filed as Annexures P/1 to P/4 submits that the respondents have purportedly carried out an inspection of the electricity connection of the petitioner and according to them, has found fault in the meter. Consequently, from documents P/1 onwards demand letters were issued thereby demanding the electricity charges. However, before doing so, the procedure as provided in terms of Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 has not been followed. His submission is that the respondents have not provided copy of provisional assessment and statutory opportunity of filing objections against the provisional assessment. He thus, submits that the demand in itself is not sustainable in the eyes of law and hence, this petition for providing the copy of assessment and opportunity of hearing against such assessment and till then, it has been prayed that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner.

The present petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:

(1) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ/order/direction quashing and setting aside demand notice dated 24.10.2025 and final notice

dated 03.12.2025 for Rs. 73,581/-.

(2) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate

writ/order/direction directing the Respondents to:

(i) supply the complete technical basis of the demands including MRI report, inspection/testing reports, and computation sheet, and (ii) decide the petitioner’s objections by a reasoned speaking

order within a time-bound period.

(3) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent no. 3 to repair/replace the allegedly faulty meters forthwith as per prescribed procedure and thereafter bill strictly as per lawful tariff and

actual consumption.

(4) Issue a writ of Prohibition and/or Mandamus restraining the Respondents from taking any coercive steps, including adding the disputed amount in monthly bills and/or disconnecting electricity supply to the Petitioner’

manufacturing units, during pendency of the dispute.

(5) Pass any such orders that this court may deem fit and proper under

the facts and circumstances of the matter.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner while referring to the

3. Objecting to this prayer, the respondents have filed their preliminary reply thereby raising objection against the maintainability of the petition in view of the fact that against an assessment under Section 126, an appeal in terms of Section 127 of the Electricity Act is provided.

4. However, neither the counsel for petitioner nor for the respondent is in position to demonstrate the assessment which has been done under the provisions of Section 126 of the aforesaid Act. This Court after considering the documents which are available on record including the reply of the respondent is of the considered view that the petition can be disposed of with the following directions :

(1) The respondents shall provide copy of the provisional assessment/assessment done in terms of Section 126 of the Electricity Act pursuant to the inspection carried out at the premises of the petitioner within a period of 15 days.

(2) The petitioner may then file his objection against such provisional assessment (if assessment is done yet).

(3) The respondents then may pass order in terms of Section 126(5) of the Act, if not already passed.

(4) If Section 126(5) assessment has already been carried out, then a copy of the same be supplied to the petitioner with an outer limit of four weeks.

(5) Till the aforesaid exercise is carried out, the respondents shall not take any coercive action against the petitioner. However, the petitioner shall have to deposit the electricity c