CHINNAMMAL Vs. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (O & M)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer in the writ petition is for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records in Letter No. AEE/O&M/AYR/CI/Enforcement/D.No.042/1415 dated 8.5.2014 of the first respondent; to quash the same and to direct the respondents to restore the service connection in SC No.288 of Muniankurichi Distribution, Ariyalur Taluk, Ariyalur District.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that she owns a land in Survey No.235/3 in Reddipalayam Village and is having electricity connection in SC No.288. According to the petitioner, it is a free agricultural service connection and the same is meant for agricultural operations. According to the petitioner, the adjacent land owner developed layouts for residential plots and for that they filled water in their tank by using her free electricity service connection. While so, when a sudden inspection was conducted by the officials of the Electricity Department on 18.11.2010, it was alleged that there was a theft of energy by the petitioner and accordingly assessment proceedings were passed as contemplated under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003 ['The Act' for short] .

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that the authorities cannot construe the action of the petitioner as theft of energy but it is only a misuse by a third party and her case will fall only under Section 126 of the Act and not the one under Section 135 of the Act. According to the petitioner, to satisfy the penal action for the theft of electricity, there should be allegations followed by a finding that there was an unauthorized abstraction of energy with dishonest intention. According to the petitioner, the impugned final assessment order passed under Section 135 of the Act is bad in law. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition seeking to quash the same.