Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/6846/2004 7/ 7 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6846 of 2004
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
=========================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To be
referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================================
SIDHDHESHWAR
TEXTILES - Petitioner(s)
Versus
DAKSHIN
GUJARAT VIJ CO. LTD. & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MS
SUDHA R GANGWAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2.
MS
LILU K BHAYA for Respondent(s) : 1,
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for
Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
Date
: 05/04/2010
ORAL JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed
this petition under Article-226 of the Constitution of India praying
for quashing and setting aside the Appellate judgment in so far as
it is against the petitioner. The petitioner has also prayed for
quashing and setting aside the revised bill and direction to the
respondent to grant the refund of the amount already paid by the
petitioner.
This Court has issued
notice on 21.6.2004. The petition was admitted on 20.9.2004 and this
Court has by way of ad-interim relief observed that the electricity
supply of the petitioner will not be disconnected on condition that
the petitioner would make the payment of the supplementary bill
amount by three equal installments. The Court has also permitted
the respondent to levy delay payment charges if the amount is not
received within the agreed period.
It is the case of the
petitioner that the petitioner is a consumer of the Gujarat
Electricity Board and his consumer number is 05101/13257/7 LTP-1
with contract load of 20 HP. The petitioner is running a textile
twisting unit. The petitioner had applied on 15.7.2003 for increase
of the load from 20 to 35 i.e. 15 additional HP. The petitioner had
also submitted a test report on 29.12.2003. The meter of the
petitioner was burnt on 30.6.2003. Thereafter, on 2.7.2003 the
checking officers had come to the unit of the petitioner and
replaced the burnt meter. A checking report was prepared in this
connection. Thereafter, the officers of the respondent Board visited
the unit of the petitioner on 5.9.2003 and inspected the electrical
installation. During the checking it was alleged that the petitioner
has committed theft of electricity. Thereafter, a special bill
amounting to Rs.9,37,159.49 was issued to the petitioner. After the
impugned order, on 19.9.2003 the petitioner deposited a sum of
Rs.1,89,450/- being 20% of the impugned bill and the power
connection has been restored to the petitioner.
The petitioner thereafter
filed an Appeal before the Appellate Committee of the Board which
was numbered as Appeal No.B-22 of 2004. The Appellate Committee
after hearing the party partly allowed the Appeal. Pursuant to the
said Appellate order revised bill was issued to the petitioner for a
sum of Rs.7,25,145.11 including the delay payment charges.
It is this order of the
Appellate Committee which is under challenge in the present
petition.
On issuance of notice an
affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of the respondent. Ms.Lilu
Bhaya, learned advocate appearing for the respondent has submitted
that the Appellate Committee has examined all the aspects of the
matter and arrived at the conclusion of granting installments. She
has further submitted that on receipt of the supplementary bill the
petitioner approached the competent authority of the respondent and
obtained installments in the matter of payment of the bill by
showing willingness to pay the bill and on the other hand the
petitioner has filed the present petition. She has further submitted
that the petitioner has made an application on 18.5.2004 asking for
installment. The respondent board has granted installments whereby
the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.2 lacs on or before 31.5.2004
and remaining Rs.5,24,145.11 in five equal installments. The
respondent Board has also made it very clear that as per the Rules,
delayed payment charges would be at the rate of 1.5% interest per
month. It was also made clear that if the installments are not paid
in time, the electricity would be disconnected. It appears that
pursuant to the said installments the petitioner has made payment of
Rs.2 lacs. However, there is no further details with regard to
payment.
Be that as it may, at the
time of filing the petition before this Court the petitioner has not
disclosed this fact to the Court that the petitioner has already
approached the respondent authorities for installments and the same
were granted. On the contrary this Court has granted three
installments for making the payment of supplementary bill.
Having considered the
affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent, more particularly the
fact regarding non-disclosure of the petitioner’s application to the
respondent authority and granting of installments by the respondent
authorities the petition is dismissed only on the ground of
suppression of fact. Even otherwise, the order passed by the
Appellate Committee is just and proper order, which cannot be
interfered with by this Court while exercising its power under
Article-226 of the Constitution of India. The petition is,
therefore, dismissed. Interim-relief granted earlier stands vacated.
It is made clear that if the installments as directed by this Court
are not paid by the petitioner the respondent authorities are at
liberty to disconnect the electricity connection.
With these directions and
observations this petition is accordingly dismissed. Rule is
discharged.
(K. A. PUJ, J.)
kks
Top