LAWS(PAT)-2009-5-81

BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN AND THE SECRETARY, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. SHEW VIJAY UDYOG FORBESGANJ, THROUGH ITS MANAGER, NIRMAL KUMAR SAMDARIA SON OF LATE B L SAMDARIA

Decided On May 13, 2009
Bihar State Electricity Board, Through Its Chairman And The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board Appellant
V/S
Shew Vijay Udyog Forbesganj, Through Its Manager, Nirmal Kumar Samdaria Son Of Late B L Samdaria Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter, in short, referred to as 'the Board') is supplier of electricity and the Respondent M/s Shew Vijay Udyog Ltd. is an Industrial Unit of High Tension Electricity Consumer under the appellant Board.

(2.) The respondent paid electricity bill to the appellant Board till April 1999 on the basis of the consumption recorded in the Meter in the respondent's premises. The respondent's case was that on 26th May 1999, the Electric Meter went out of order and stopped recording consumption and the said fact was brought to the notice of the Electrical Executive Engineer. The respondent also requested the Electrical Assistant Engineer to replace the defective Meter. However, the meter was not replaced, but the petitioner was served with a bill dated 8th June 1999 for the month of May 1999 calculated on the basis of consumption of 13961 units. The petitioner was subsequently also served with the bill for the month of June and July 1999 on the basis of the consumption of the same units under respective bills dated 8th July 1999 and 7th August 1999. The respondent's case was further that the bills for the three months i.e. May, June and July 1999 were raised on the basis of Minimum Monthly Guarantee charges and that on the basis of that consumption under bills fuel surcharge had also been raised.

(3.) The respondent also asserted that he, being a High Tension Electric consumer was subject to Annual Minimum Guarantee under the agreement and the provisions of Monthly Minimum Guarantee charge was not applicable to him and, therefore, in view of Clause 16.8 of the Tariff the consumption for the three months i.e. May, June and July 1999 could not be raised on the basis of Monthly Minimum Guarantee charge, but the same had to be assessed on the basis of average consumption for the previous three months from the date on which the meter had become out of order or the average consumption for the corresponding three months of the previous year.