UNITY INDUSTRIES Vs. GUJARAT ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to direct the respondent to allow the petitioner firm to use their own DG set for generating the electricity.

(2.) THE short facts of the case are that the petitioner is doing the business of manufacturing stainless steel. On 07. 08. 2001, the respondent Board carried out inspection at the firm of the petitioner, whereby it was found that the petitioner was using 106 HP load against the contract load of 50 HP. Thus, the petitioner firm is using 56 HP unauthorized load without permission of the Board and thereby has committed malpractice of using extra load. Pursuant thereto, the respondent Board disconnected the power supply and issued a supplementary bill of Rs. 3,21,900/- to the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the said bill, the petitioner preferred an appeal being Appeal No. B-305/2002 before the appellate authority. However, the appellate authority partly allowed the appeal and directed to revise the supplementary bill by taking the unauthorized extra load of 23 HP in place of 56 HP. Thereafter on 29. 01. 2003, a supplementary bill to the tune of Rs. 1,32,463/- was issued by the respondent-Board. The respondent- Board also levied minimum charges of Rs. 51,267/ -. However, the petitioner made a representation to respondent no. 2 to reconnect the electric connection no. 1 after remittance of the supplementary bill or in the alternative to issue NOC to use their own DG Set. It is the case of the petitioner that though efforts are being made for reconnection and/or permission to use the DG set, the respondent- Board had not take any action till date. Hence, this petition.

(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent- Board is not issuing NOC for using their own DG set. On perusal of the documents on record, it appears that the petitioner has not taken prior permission of the respondent-Board to take the DG set. The DG set is granted to its existing consumers only to meet the requirement of power supply in case of emergency. In the present case, there is no need for DG set. However, the petitioner's connection was permanently disconnected therefore, there is no question of allowing to use the DG set. Apart from that the petitioner's connection is now a fresh connection and therefore, the petitioner has to approach the appropriate authority for the same. In that view of the matter, I find no reason to interfere with the same under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.