H.ABBAS Vs. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner obtained temporary connection for 2KW load under tariff LT7 bearing No.KTL 285. The Vigilance Cell of MESCOM, Mangalore conducted an inspection on the petitioner's premises and the petitioner was found unauthorisedly using the excess load of 4355 watts. Based on the inspection report, the 1st respondent raised back billing of Rs.76,091.00 as specified under Condition No.42.01 of the Conditions of Supply of Electricity of the Distribution License in the State of Karnataka. Against the said back billing, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 3rd respondent under the provisions of the Karnataka Electricity Commission (Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and Ombudsman) Regulations, 2004 (for short 'Regulation, 2004')

(2.) The 3rd respondent - Appellate Authority by order dtd. 24/9/2016 dismissed the appeal confirming the back billing raised by the 1st respondent demanding a sum of Rs.76,090.56 towards unauthorised use of excess load of 4355 watts. Taking exception to the same, this writ petition is filed.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the inspection report clearly indicates that the electrical appliances were unplugged and in the absence of any material that the petitioner has unauthorisedly used the excess load of 4355 watts, the impugned demand of Rs.76,090.56 made by the 1st respondent is without any substance. He further submits that the Appellate Authority, ignoring this material aspect, only on the wrong premise that the petitioner has admitted the inspection report has dismissed the appeal.