RAJNIKANT TEXTILES Vs. DY ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs;

(2.) THE facts in brief are that on 31. 03. 2000 when a surprise check was done by the authorities of the respondent-Board at the Unit of the petitioner, they found that excess load was being utilized unauthorizedly. Therefore, the petitioner-Unit was served with a supplementary bill dated 03. 04. 2000. The petitioner-Unit challenged the same before the appellate authority of the respondent-Board by way of an appeal. However, the same was rejected by the appellate authority vide order dated 27. 06. 2001. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has preferred the present petition.

(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. During the inspection conducted on 31. 03. 2000, the authority found that the petitioner-Unit was using connected load of 117 HP though the contract load was only 70 HP. Therefore, the petitioner-Unit was unauthorizedly using 47 HP extra load, thereby, committing breach of the relevant provisions of the Conditions of Supply of Electric Energy. Since the above malpractice was proved, the respondent-Board disconnected the electric supply and issued the supplementary bill in question. Looking to the illegality committed by the petitioner-Unit, I am of the opinion that the respondent-Board was completely justified in taking the impugned action.