PRASAD VERMA Vs. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, PATNA BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent no. 1 as well as respondent nos. 2 to 4 and have also perused the records of this case.

(2.) This writ application appears to have been filed seeking quashing of clause 6 of the tariff framed by the respondent-Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Board") vide its internal notification No. COM/TAR/904/ 2000-17 dated 31.5.2001 and notification dated 28.7.2001 being ultra vires of Section 26 of the Indian Electricity Act as well as for quashing of audit objection no. RAO/EB/VI/02 dated 23.1.2004 raised by the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna directing the respondent no. 3 to bill the petitioner at the rate of 144 units per KW per month, i.e., 1738 units per month for the months of June, July and August 2001 and at the rate of 288 units per KW per month, i.e., 3456 units per month from September 2001 to March 2003. Petitioner also seeks quashing of the consequential bill raised for the month of August 2004 to the tune of Rs. 2,49,175.26 and also for restoration of his electricity connection. However, at the time of hearing learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has already undertaken on 15.12.2011 not to press the relief no. 1 (a) with regard to the quashing of clause 6 of the tariff framed by. the respondent-Board.

(3.) The petitioner was NDS consumer and his meter was burnt in June 1996. Thereafter, he was being charged at the minimum guaranteed units on the basis of the existing rules. Petitioner's meter was replaced in the month of April 2003. Suddenly, in the bill raised for the month of August 2004, a copy of which is appended as Annexure- 4/A to the writ application, an amount of Rs. 2,49,241.34 was shown as arrear and subsequently, due to nonpayment of the aforesaid arrears, electricity supply of the petitioner has been disconnected compelling the petitioner to file this writ application,