MUJAMMIL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. Admit the petition.

(2.) IT is pertinent to mention here that hitherto WPCRL No. 1151 of 2012 was filed in the same matter and this Court while allowing the same directed the Investigating Officer not to arrest the petitioner, if he deposits the charges of electricity pilferage calculated at the norms and parameters set up by Uttarakhand Power Regulation Commission.

(3.) LOOKING to non -speaking assessment order issued on 27.11.2012 by the Executive Engineer, the amount is reduced to the extent of 60% of the said amount calculated by Executive Engineer. He is ordered to permit the petitioner to deposit 60% of the impugned amount positively and explain under what circumstances he did not acknowledge the order issued by this Court on 01.12.2012.