Disposed

Azmat Kathat S/O Dula Ji Kathat v. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited

Rajasthan HC3 Nov 2025CW/16585/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a demand notice reclassifying his agricultural electricity connection as commercial without following Section 126 procedure. Court disposed of the writ petition granting liberty to file objections within seven days; respondents to hear and decide within four weeks. No coercive action for five weeks.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file objection to demand notice within seven days; respondents to decide after hearing within four weeks; no coercive action for five weeks.

Azmat Kathat S/O Dula Ji Kathat Vs Ajmer Vidyut… — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:44101]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16585/2025

¶4

Azmat Kathat S/o Dula Ji Kathat, R/o Ali Nagar, Noondri, Medratan, Po. Noondri - Mendratan, Ajmer, Rajasthan 305901

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Panchsheel Nagar, Makadwali Road, Ajmer Through Its Managing Director.

¶8

Assistant Engineer (O And M-II), AVVNL, Sedriya, Beawar, Rajasthan.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aaryan Pareek, Adv.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶12

Order

¶13

03/11/2025

¶14

By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned demand notice dated 16.06.2025, by which electricity connection, taken by the petitioner, under the category of agriculture, has been treated as commercial connection and thereafter, a demand of Rs.8,726/- has been issued against the petitioner. Counsel submits that before issuing such demand, the respondents are supposed to follow the provisions contained under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short, ‘Act of 2003’), but without following the same, straightaway, the impugned demand has been raised against the petitioner, hence, interference of this Court is warranted.

¶15

Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record.

(2 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:44101]

[CW-16585/2025]

A complete mechanism has been provided under Section 126 of the Act of 2003 which reads as under:

¶20

“ Section 126: Assessment:---(1) If on an inspection of any place or premises or after inspection of the equipments, gadgets, machines, devices found connected or used, or after inspection of records maintained by any person, the assessing officer comes to the conclusion that such person is indulging in unauthorized use of electricity, he shall provisionally assess to the best of his judgement the electricity charges payable by such person or by any other person benefited by such use.

¶21

(2) The order of provisional assessment shall be served upon the person in occupation or possession or in charge of the place or premises in such manner as may be prescribed.

¶22

1[(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.]

¶23

(4) Any person served with the order of provisional assessment, may, accept such assessment and deposit the assessed amount with the licensee within seven days of service of such provisional assessment order upon him: 2[***]

¶24

3[(5) If the assessing officer reaches to the conclusion that unauthorised use of electricity has taken place, the assessment shall be made for the entire period during which such unauthorized use of electricity has taken place and if, however, the period during which such unauthorised use of electricity has taken place cannot be ascertained, such period shall be limited to a period of twelve months immediately preceding the date of inspection.]

¶25

(6) The assessment under this section shall be made at a rate equal to 1[twice] the tariff rates

(3 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:44101]

[CW-16585/2025]

applicable for the relevant category of services specified in sub-section (5). Explanation.- For the purposes of this section,-

¶30

(a) “assessing officer” means an officer of a State Government or Board or licensee, as the case may be, designated as such by the State Government; b) “unauthorised use of electricity” means the usage of electricity –

¶31

(i) by any artificial means; or

¶32

(ii) by a means not authorised by the concerned person or authority or licensee; or

¶33

(iii) through a tampered meter; or 2[(iv) for the purpose other than for which the usage of electricity was authorised; or

¶34

k(v) for the premises or areas other than those for which the supply of electricity was authorized.”

¶35

Bare perusal of the aforesaid provision clearly indicates that a person to whom such notice is served, is entitled to file objection and if such objection is submitted by the person aggrieved, then a reasonable opportunity of hearing is required to be given to him before passing the final assessment order. In the instant case, final order has not been passed.

¶36

Considering the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the mandate contained under Section 126 of the Act of 2003, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to file objection against the demand notice dated 16.06.2025 within a period of seven days from today. In case, such objection is submitted by the petitioner within above stipulated time, it is expected from the respondents to hear and decide the same, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks thereafter.

¶37

For a period of five weeks, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner.

(4 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:44101]

[CW-16585/2025]

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶42

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶43

AARZOO ARORA /23

Azmat Kathat S/O Dula Ji Kathat v. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azmat Kathat S/O Dula Ji Kathat v. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited

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

Bhanwar Singh S/O Shri Dana Ram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Kamala Meena W/O Shri Nathu Lal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Capri Global Capital Ltd. Vs Superintendent of Police

Rameshwar Lal S/O Guni Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Ganpati Construction Company Vs State of Rajasthan

Shakur Kathat C/O Nathu Kathat Vs Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited