MAA CEMENT CO Vs. J S E B

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the energy bill raised by the Respondents for the month of March, 2002 to May, 2002 having raised on the basis of Minimum Guarantee Charges.

(2.) Admittedly, the petitioner is a High Tension Insulation Service (H. T. I. S. ) Consumer having 196 K. V. A. contract demand. According to the petitioner, its meter was burnt in February, 2002. The meter was working up to January, 2002 perfectly and the average unit consumption of petitioner from May, 2001 to January , 2002 was about 530 units per month. It is alleged that raising of energy bill on the basis of average Minimum Guarantee charges for the period, the meter remained defective, is illegal. The petitioner earlier brought to the notice of the respondents that the meter WAS burnt, but it was not replaced immediately.

(3.) According to the petitioner, in case of non-functioning of the meter, the energy bill should have been raised on the basis of last three months' average consumption.