RAMASUBBU GINNING FACTORY Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed challenging an order of the second respondent in issuing a final assessment order arising under Sec. 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

(2.) According to the petitioner, they are having a LT service connection in Survey No.171 and they are running a ginning factory. On 12/1/2010, the electricity meter got burnt and immediately, on the same day, the petitioner has informed the same to the second respondent herein. The second respondent had conducted an inspection on 17/1/2010. After inspection, the second respondent had suspected theft of energy and they initiated proceedings under the Electricity Act. An Observation Mahazer was issued to the writ petitioner on 17/1/2010. As per the said Observation Mahazer, the seal in the meter terminal cover was intact. The company seal and seal by the MRT wing on the outer cover of the meter was also intact. However, the seal covering over the box in which the meter was kept had been damaged and the bottom portion had burnt. The said burning could not have happened either due to leakage of electricity or due to short circuit. The Observation Mahazer further pointed out that the said burning of the meter would have happened only by some external interference and hence, there is theft of energy.

(3.) Based upon the above said Observation Mahazer, a provisional assessment order was issued to the writ petitioner demanding a sum of Rs.12,17,688.00. The petitioner had challenged the said provisional assessment order in W.P(MD).No.840 of 2010. The said writ petition was allowed on 2/1/2014 directing the respondents to pass orders after affording due opportunity to the writ petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner has submitted his explanation on 6/3/2014. In the said explanation, the petitioner has contended that the meter should be sent for inspection to a lab in order to find out the reason for burning of the said meter. The petitioner has also undertaken to bear the expenses for the same. In the said explanation, the petitioner has agreed to accept the said inspection report and proceed further.