ANUJ BANSAL Vs. COLLECTOR MUZAFFARNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitutionhas been filed for quashing the citation dated 24.9.2002 (Annexure -13 to the writ petition) and for restraining the respondents from taking any coercive action against the petitioner.

(2.) M /s. Nehru Steel Rolling Mills (hereinafter referred to as the Rolling Mills) was sanctioned a load of 700 K.V.A. and an agreement was executed between the aforesaid Rolling Mills and U. P. State Electricity Board (U.P.S.E.B.) (now U. P. Power Corporation Ltd.). On behalf of the Rolling Mills, the agreement was signed by the petitioner Anuj Bansal. On 11.5.1994, a check/raid of the Rolling Mills was done by the staff of U.P.S.E.B. and they found that theft of electricity was being committed. The electricity connection was disconnected on the same day and thereafter an assessment bill of Rs. 92,92, 215.40 was issued. Subsequently, a final bill was prepared on 13.12.1995 for Rs. 1,25,22,329 and recovery was sought to be made in accordance with the provisions of U. P. Government Electrical Undertakings (Dues Recovery) Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(3.) SRI R. K. Jain, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri P. K. Jain, advocate has submitted that in view of the provisions of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act and U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Rules and also the decision of the Apex Court in Ram Narain Agarwal v. State of U. P., AIR 1984 SC 1213, the objection made by the petitioner ought to be decided first before he can be arrested in proceedings for recovery of the amount.