O R D E R

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the Assessment Order dt.23.01.2023 in Letter No.ADE/OP/TSD-1/KMM/F.Short-Bill/D.No.1398/-- dt.23.01.2023 imposing back billing of Rs.6,70,395/- as illegal and arbitrary and to pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the interests of justice.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of this Writ Petition are that the petitioner is doing business in the sale of Cell Phones under the name and style of Big-C and the petitioner has taken service connection bearing No.150115589 in category LT2 (B), i.e., non-domestic and commercial. It is submitted that the petitioner has been regularly paying the consumption charges without any default, but he received the assessment notice dt.23.01.2022 stating that the service meter of the petitioner’s premises is found to be faulty and after inspection and testing of the meter by the department personnel, it was found that in the R-Ph meter terminal, the S1, S2 contacts are having loose contact and after tightening of the screws in the meter terminal, the current recording in the R-Ph was found normal. Therefore, the department proposed to do back billing on the basis of the test report given by ADE/LT & CT Meters/KMM dt.06.01.2023. It is submitted that after receiving the notice, the petitioner appeared before the respondent authorities on 20.02.2023 for giving a representation, but the 4th respondent refused to receive the same on the ground that the petitioner failed to pay 50% of the demanded amount. It is the apprehension of the petitioner that power supply would be disconnected to the petitioner’s premises. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri K. Durga Prasad, while reiterating the averments made in the writ affidavit, submitted that the petitioner has been making payment of consumption bills regularly from the year 2017 to the year 2022 and in spite of inspection made several times, no fault has been found in the meter and suddenly in the month of November, 2022 without any fault of the petitioner, the respondents have come to the conclusion that the meter is faulty and they have proposed to do back billing of the consumption charges. It is submitted that when there is no charge of any tampering of the meter by the petitioner, the petitioner cannot be penalised. He submitted that the respondents are threatening to disconnect the power supply in spite of the petitioner approaching the authorities with its representation.

4. Sri Zakir Ali Danish, learned Standing Counsel for TSNPDCL appearing for respondents 2 to 5 submitted that the meter has been found faulty and thereafter, after testing the same, a notice was given to the petitioner, but the petitioner did not respond to the same nor did it pay 50% of the demanded amount and therefore, the respondents are constrained to take coercive steps. He, however, denied that the petitioner has approached the respondents with a representation dt.20.02.2023 or that the respondents have denied opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. He further pointed out that since the petitioner has not paid 50% of the demanded amount, power supply was disconnected on 17.02.2023, but on the assurance given by the petitioner that they would make payment, power supply was restored. However, the petitioner has not made any payment till date.

5. Having regard to the above submissions of the parties, this Court finds from the impugned notice dt.23.01.2023 and the annexure thereto that there is no break-up of the period and the units for which back billing has been made. The learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the respondents can recover the dues or consumption charges only for the immediate preceding 12 months when there is no fault of the petitioner on the faulty functioning of the meter. However, this Court is of the opinion that since the