PRAGATI INDIASTONE CRUSHER Vs. M.P. POORVA KSHETRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is consumer of respondent electricity distribution Company (Discom) entered into an agreement for high tension electricity supply for the purpose of stone crusher. The petitioner approached the Electricity Consumers Grievance Redressal Forum Jabalpur, which is a statutory forum constituted under Sec. 42(5) of the Electricity Act 2003 against the alleged illegal electricity bill of the petitioner's unit raised by respondent-Discom.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly admits that he has an alternative remedy under sub-Sec. 6 of Sec. 42 of the Electricity Act 2003 to approach the Ombudsman. However, he submits that there is no bar to entertain the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. He places reliance on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sh. Masood Ahmed Khan, 2010(9) SCC 496. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. vs. Dy. Commissioner of Excise, 2015(8) SCC 519 and also in the case of Management of MS Nally Bharat Engineering Co. Ltd vs. State of Bihar, 1990 (2) SCC 48.

(3.) According to the petitioner, once the high tension connection was disconnected on 23/6/2021 the respondent-Discom was not legally entitled for raising any bill against the petitioner. However, the Electricity Consumer Redressal Forum vide impugned order dtd. 28/12/2021 (Annexure-P-1) rejected the complaint of the petitioner holding that the agreement period for the high tension supply was for a period of two years expiring on 16/7/2022 and, therefore, as per the terms of the agreement, the petitioner is liable to make the payment of minimum charge and other applicable tariff in accordance with agreement.