PARAMJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALTHOUGH a long story has been narrated in the writ petition based on a political rivalry between the wife of the petitioner, a contestant to the Zila Parishad and Panchayat Samiti elections notified by the State of Punjab inter alia for Village Ghawaddi in District Ludhiana on 19.5.2013 as a candidate of the party in opposition on the one hand and the leaders of the ruling party on the other. It is alleged that the petitioner was roped in a false case of unauthorized use of electricity in his agricultural fields. It is averred that the Local MLA directed the 5th respondent, a Junior Engineer with the Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., respondent no. 2 to implicate the petitioner in a false case. The 5th respondent is said to have raided the premises of the petitioner at the behest of the local MLA to inspect the electricity meter and make out a case of theft of energy. It is said that since the respondent could not implicate the petitioner in a case of theft of electricity, a false case has been prepared that the petitioner has indulged in unauthorized use of electricity. Besides this, an FIR was also registered against the petitioner, his supporters and 25 other persons under Sections 186, 353, 148, 149, 506 of the IPC.

(2.) THE provisional assessment order has been passed under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short "the Act") asking him to pay Rs. 1,01,022/ - (P -3). In the background of the above facts pleaded in the petition, it is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the 5th respondent had no jurisdiction to check the premises with respect to petitioner's account no. 13/663. It is only the Assessing Officer named in the Notification dated 27.12.2004 (P -4) who could carry out the checking/inspection. The notification (P -4) issued under Section 126 of the Act is meant for implementation of the provisions under Section 126 of the Act for LT consumers like the petitioner. The Assessing Officer can only be the Assistant Engineer/Assistant Executive Engineer/Executive Engineers of Operation Wing of the area as mentioned in the Schedule to the Notification.

(3.) LEARNED counsel does not dispute that the impugned provisional order of assessment for unauthorized use of electricity has been issued and signed by the Assistant Executive Engineer, Distribution Sub Division Sarinh. He submits that it is only when the Assessing Officer who after inspection of any place or premises etc., comes to the conclusion that a person is indulging in unauthorized use of electricity, he shall provisionally assess, to the best of his judgment, the electricity charges payable. He points out to the impugned notice dated 15.5.2013 (P -3) to urge that the Assistant Executive Engineer/Assessing Officer has relied on the checking done by the Junior Engineer -5th respondent on 12.5.2013 on which inspection, the Junior Engineer found the following violation: "Meter was found to be connected with 24 hours supply pole".