SUSHILA JAISWAL Vs. C E S C LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application is directed for cancellation of an electric bill raised by the C.E.S.C. Ltd., for the month of March, 1990 and for necessary direction to submit correct bill after testing meter.

(2.) The petitioner's case is that she is the owner of a factory with six workers working therein She was sanctioned power load of 52.3 H.P. and that she was consuming the power daily for four hours. She alleged that the reading of the meter in January 1989 was 72959 and in November, 1989 reading in the said meter was 76843. Thus the amount of electricity consumed from January 1989 till November, 1989 in her meter was 3884 units, the value of which would have been Rs. 4272.40 P. A complaint was made by the petitioner on the allegation of the meter was running defectively. Thereafter on March 1990, the respondents recorded the meter reading as 117028 without any basis and recorded the consumption as 40,185 units which includes the bill from October, 198 9/01/1990. The petitioner's husband visited the office of the CESC Ltd., and he informed that the petitioner is ready to give the charges for testing of the electric meter. She received the reply that the meter was running correctly. According to the petitioner the value of the total consumption of the electricity cannot be more than Rs. 9544.80 up to the month of March, 1990 in her factory. The respondents CESC Ltd., raised the bill for the month of March, 1990 showing the units consumed as 40185 and demanded Rs. 67,737.46. The bill has been challenged on the ground as without any basis whatsoever. The petitioner also alleged that she was apprehensive that her electric connection may be disconnected at any point of time. The petitioner accordingly filed the writ application for issuing the writ in the nature of mandamus for direction upon the respondents not to disconnect her electric connection and to withdraw and cancel the inflated bill of March, 1990 and raise the fresh bill for the same. After the filing of the aforesaid application number of interim orders were obtained.

(3.) The respondents CESC Ltd., though has not filed any affidavit-in-opposition in this matter, still then their case, as it appears from the application for variation / modification/ vacating of the interim order, is that the premises of the writ petitioner at 98, Girish Ghosh Road, Howrah is equipped with motor meter (082347-6 Dial) and a light and fan Meter No. 0423307. The Meter Reader/ Inspector of the CESC Ltd. could not read the meters due to non-availability of the access to the said meter board since October, 1989. In order to avoid accummulation of charges, the writ petitioner was charged provisionally at 350 units in respect of consumption in her light and fan meter and 400 units against the motor meter. The meters were kept under observation and accordingly the bills in the premises of the petitioner did not include power consumption for the period of November, 198 9/02/1990. While the said meters were working properly on observation, the bill for the month of March, 1990 account bill was raised covering consumption for five months against the motor meter. The aforesaid vacating petition having not been disposed of the order passed in the writ application shall also be applicable in respect of the said petition.