Partly allowed

Bibha Prasad Singh @ Biva Prasad Singh v. The Chairman Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors.

Patna HC3 Apr 2014CWJC/20989/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the respondent's calculation of final energy loss for the petitioner, directing a fresh assessment after an opportunity of hearing. The court ordered restoration of electricity upon deposit of 50% of the provisional amount, deducting continuous bills paid post-disconnection.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of final assessment; direction to restore electrical connection after petitioner deposits 50% of provisional loss minus paid bills.

Bibha Prasad Singh @ Biva Prasad Singh Vs The Chairman… — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20989 of 2013 In

¶2

====================================================== 1. Bibha Prasad Singh @ Biva Prasad Singh W/O Baidhya Nath Prasad Singh R/O Village- Thawe Road, Near Sabnam Hotel, Gopalganj, P.O. + P.S. + District- Gopalganj

¶3

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus

¶4

The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, Dist.- Patna

¶5

The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, Dist.- Patna

¶6

The Secretary, North Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd., Electricity Supply Division, Gopalganj, Dist.- Gopalganj

¶7

The Superintending Engineer, Electricity Department, Gopalganj, Dist.Gopalganj

¶8

The Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Sub-Division, Gopalganj, Dist.Gopalganj

¶9

The Assistant Engineer, Electric Supply Sub-Division, Gopalganj, Dist.Gopalganj

¶10

The Junior Engineer, Electric Supply Sub-Division, Gopalganj, Dist.Gopalganj

¶11

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Dwivedi For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh

¶12

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER

¶13

6 03-04-2014 Heard Mr. Udit Narain Singh, learned counsel for

¶14

the petitioner and Mrs. Archana Sinha for respondent North Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited and its officers (hereinafter to be referred as „the Company‟) .

¶15

The parties have exchanged pleadings.

¶16

The petitioner was given domestic connection vide consumer no. 1680/DSII, GPO-09761. In an inspection carried out of the premises of the petitioner on 8.7.2013, it was found that the

¶17

Patna High Court CWJC No.20989 of 2013 (6) dt.03-04-2014

¶18

2/4

¶19

petitioner was involved in commission of theft of energy. Following such inspection and seizure, an F.I.R. vide Gopalganj Town PS Case No. 296/2013 (Annexure 2) was lodged. The electrical connection given to the petitioner was disconnected. In the F.I.R. the respondents provisionally quantified the loss sustained by the Company on account of such theft of energy in the sum of Rs.4,13,185/-.

¶20

It is the contention of the petitioner that earlier to this, the respondents were raising bills on average basis which has been paid by the petitioner. It is next contended that the respondents were required to give notice in terms of section 126 of the Electricity Act for consideration of final assessment of loss but the same was not done.

¶21

By filing supplementary counter affidavit it has been stated by the respondent Company that final assessment of loss has been made by the respondents on 24.7.2013.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner draws attention of the court to the provisions contained in section 126 of the Electricity Act, the statements made in the writ petition and the supplementary affidavit and submits that no opportunity by issuing notice to file objection was ever given by the respondent Company before passing the order of final assessment in terms of

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.20989 of 2013 (6) dt.03-04-2014

¶24

3/4

¶25

the provisions of the Act. Sub-section (3) of section 126 of the Electricity Act reads thus:

¶26

“(3) The person, on whom an order has been served under sub-section (2), shall be entitled to file objections, if any, against the provisional assessment before the assessing officer, who shall, after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to such person, pass a final order of assessment within thirty days from the date of service of such order of provisional assessment, of the electricity charges payable by such person.”

¶27

It, thus, appears that the respondents were required

¶28

to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to file objection before passing the order of final assessment.

¶29

From the counter affidavit as well as the supplementary counter affidavit filed by the respondent Company it appears that no such opportunity was granted to the petitioner.

¶30

Regard being had to the above, this court is persuaded to quash the calculation of final assessment appended with the supplementary counter affidavit (at page 7 thereof). The petitioner is directed to file his objection before the appropriate / competent authority of the respondent Company within three weeks and thereafter the respondents shall pass a final order of assessment in terms of section 126 of the Act.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since 8.7.2013 the petitioner is running without electricity. He, therefore, submits that during the pendency of the case either

¶32

Patna High Court CWJC No.20989 of 2013 (6) dt.03-04-2014

¶33

4/4

¶34

before the respondent company and / or before the criminal court, the electrical connection of the petitioner be restored. It is stated that even after carrying out the inspection on 8.7.2013, the respondent Company had been raising electrical bill(s) on average basis which the petitioner has been paying continuously.

¶35

Considering the entire facts, this court directs that the petitioner shall deposit 50% of the provisional assessment amount with the respondent Company after deducting the amount of the bill(s) which the petitioner has already paid after 8.7.2013. No sooner the 50% of the provisional loss in the manner stated above is deposited, the respondent Company, and in particular, the Assistant Engineer, Electric Supply Subdivision, Gopalganj, (respondent no.6) shall restore the electrical connection of the petitioner within seventy two hours thereafter.

¶36

This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid observation(s) / direction(s).

¶37

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J)

¶38

haque/-

Bibha Prasad Singh @ Biva Prasad Singh v. The Chairman Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bibha Prasad Singh @ Biva Prasad Singh v. The Chairman Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Bharti Vs The Patna Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Kartik Prasad Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mukesh Kumar and Anr. Vs The Central Bank Of India, Patna andors.

Vinay Kumar Mishra Vs The Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. and Ors.

Kumari Anuradha Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Amod Kumar Biswas Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.