Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/11784/2005 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11784 of 2005
=========================================================
PATEL
PROTEINS PVT. LTD. - Petitioner(s)
Versus
GUJARAT
URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD. & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
MRUGEN K PUROHIT for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MS LILU K BHAYA for Respondent(s) : 1,
RULE
SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 29/11/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Petitioner
is consumer of electricity supplied by the respondents. He has
challenged an order dated 9.11.04 passed by the Appellate Committee
partially allowing the appeal.
Electricity
connection of the petitioner was inspected on 25.8.04 in presence of
the representative of the petitioner. Load in excess of the
authorized connection was found. Some extra wires were also noticed.
The meter was sealed and sent for testing at the Laboratory.
Ultimately, case of tampering with the meter and theft of electricity
was built. Supplementary bill of Rs.16,15,464/- was issued. The
petitioner challenged the said bill before the Appellate Committee by
paying the requisite amount of the disputed bill. Subsequently,
however, the respondents found that there was an error in calculating
the provisional bill. Revised supplementary bill of Rs.54,52,380/-
was issued which was also made part of the challenge before the
Appellate Committee. The Appellate Committee after considering the
evidence on record found that though there was tampering with the
meter and theft of electricity, reduced the calculation of load
factor and consequently directed the Electricity Company to issue a
fresh revised bill which comes to Rs.25,64,628/-.
Having
heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the
documents on record, I see no reason to interfere with the order of
the Appellate Committee. Through cogent material, the respondents had
been able to establish that there was tampering with the meter.
Clear case of theft of electricity was, therefore, made out. The
Appellate Committee has examined all aspects of the matter and found
that the meter was tampered with. However, on the basis of the
available material on record directed the Electricity Company to
reduce the load factor to C at 0.45 instead of 0.6. Nothing has
been pointed out to take a different view. Under the circumstances,
the petition is required to be dismissed.
The
contention that the revised bill was issued by the DSO of the
Electricity Company also cannot be accepted sine it would be the
communication and not the decision to refuse the bill which can be
attributed to the said authority. Even otherwise, no error is found
in the supplementary bill issued by the Electricity Company
subsequent to the decision of the Appellate Committee.
Considering
all these aspects of the matter, the petition is dismissed. Rule is
discharged. Interim relief is vacated.
(Akil
Kureshi, J.)
(vjn)
Top