RUDRA STEEL Vs. JHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the Court.--Heard the counsel for the parties.

(2.) Learned counsel for the respondent-Board has admitted that on earlier occasion a mistake was committed while mentioning the charging of contract demand according to Clause-4 and that was corrected by the notification dated 6.4.2000. It is not in dispute that presently also mistake in the Introduction of the Tariff Schedule dated 7.5.2001 was noticed by the officers of the respondent-Board itself and it was brought to the notice by the Board vide Annexure-13.

(3.) Be that as it may, the point is very short in this matter as admittedly the petitioner's unit's Meter went defective and it approached for replacement of the said Meter and accordingly the said Meter was replaced by the order passed by this Court only. Therefore, the charging section for the petitioner was Clause-6, which is specific Clause providing the method, by which the electricity consumption shall be assessed in a case when the matter went defective or damaged or it goes burnt. It provides that the energy consumption shall be assessed for the bills at the rate of 300 Units/K.V.A and demand charges as per the contract demand at the tariff rate.