DEVRAJ Vs. BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition impugns the order dated 16th November, 2009 of the Office of Electricity Ombudsman constituted under the Electricity Act, 2003. THE only question falling for adjudication being as to whether the electricity dues claimed from the petitioner are time barred or not, need was not felt to call for any counter affidavit and the counsel for the respondent appearing on advance notice heard finally.

(2.) THE undisputed facts are that the petitioner has an industrial electricity connection; no bills with respect thereto were raised since the date of installation; the petitioner in the year 2003 approached the Permanent Lok Adalat with the grievance of the bills having not been raised; the Permanent Lok Adalat vide order dated 14 th August, 2003, finding a total sum of '94,446/- to be then due from the petitioner up till 20th May, 2003 made provisions for payment thereof in installments. However even thereafter no bills were raised. On 27th July, 2004, the meter was changed under the scheme of mass replacement of electro mechanical meters; however no bills were raised thereafter also.

(3.) PER contra, the petitioner relied upon Section 56(2) of the Act to contend that the dues not recovered within two years had become time barred. It was further contended that for the deficiency in service and mistake of the respondent in non-punching of the master date, the petitioner could not be burdened with heavy payment.