K DIVAKAR BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BANGALORE Vs. COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, assailing the correctness of the order dated 6th September 2006 bearing No.E5P.724/CP3/E135-12294-98 vide Annexure A, has presented the instant writ petition. Further, petitioner has sought for a direction, directing the respondents to refund the amount of Rs.25,000/- and Rs.2,613/- dated 19th April 2004 deposited by the petitioner as per Annexures E and E1 in pursuance of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.5906/2001 dated 1st March 2001.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that, petitioner had availed the power supply through the installation bearing RR No.E5P-724 with a sanctioned load of 10 HP on 23rd May 1990 for running the floor mill and wet grinder. THE same was transferred in the name of the petitioner on 18th July 1994. When things stood thus, the officials of the respondents " Company inspected the premises of the petitioner on 6th January 2001 and reported that, there was a theft of energy by tampering the meter by inserting a small metal piece. Based on the said inspection report, the jurisdictional sub Division Officer has issued the back billing charges for a sum of Rs.83,228/- as per Regulation No.44.07 and directed the petitioner to pay the said sum. Assailing the correctness of the back billing demand notice issued by respondent " Company, petitioner herein filed writ petition in W.P.No.5906/2001 and the said matter had come up for consideration before this Court on 1st March 2001. THE said writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of by this Court with an observation that, the demand notice dated 27th January 2001 may be treated as show cause notice and the writ petitioner was permitted to file the objections if any to the same within fifteen days from that date to the respondent " Company and the respondents were directed to take into consideration the objection or representation made therein and thereafter to pass orders in accordance with law. Further, this Court had directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/-, which may be subject to the outcome of the enquiry by the competent authority. Meanwhile, respondents were directed to restore power supply if the petitioner were to deposit the said amount of Rs.25,000/-. After disposal of the said writ petition, the petitioner herein has deposited a sum of Rs.25,000/- and another sum of Rs.2,613/- on 19th January 2001 and filed an appeal before the first appellate authority. THE said matter had come up for consideration before the first appellate authority on 6th September 2006. THE appellate authority, after considering the grounds urged by the petitioner in his memorandum of appeal and other relevant material available on file, has passed the order by taking a lenient view, on the ground of non availability of evidence from the respondents as the Inspecting Officer has retired from service and that, he has passed away recently. THE First Appellate Authority, after giving concession modified the demand notice and partly allowed the appeal and directed the jurisdictional Officer of the said Sub-Division to revise the back billing charges (BBC) prepared by the said authority after deducting the recorded consumption at one and half times the normal rates applicable to LT 5 for a period of six months and held that, the petitioner " appellant was liable to pay the same. Being aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the first appellate authority, the petitioner herein felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition assailing the correctness of the same seeking appropriate directions as referred above.

(3.) HAVING regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, to safeguard the interest of petitioner as well as respondents " Company and to meet the ends of justice, it is a fit case to direct the respondents not to recover interest in respect of the remaining balance amount as referred in the back billing charges after giving deduction in respect of the amount deposited by the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. Further, it is made clear that, the said waiver of interest in this case shall not become precedent to other cases. Further, the petitioner is directed to pay the remaining sum of Rs.58,228/- as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.