IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2025 of 2010 1. M/S OM SHRI GRAM UDYOG FOOD PROCESS COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., NASRIGANJ, DIGHA, PATNA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, BADRI KUMAR MITTAL, S/O SHRI PAWAN KUMAR MITTAL, R/O PUSHPA VIHAR COLONY, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S. CHANDHI MAIDAN, TOWN & DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA, THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (COMMERCIAL), BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA 4. THE GENERAL MANAGER-CUM-CHIEF ENGINEER, PATNA ELECTIC SUPPLY UNDERTAKING, MANGLES ROAD, PATNA 5. THE ELECTRICAL SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PATNA, ELECTRIC SUKPPLY UNDERTAKING (WEST), MANGLES ROAD, PATNA 6. THE ELECTRICAL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PATNA, ELECTRIC SUPPLY UNDERTAKING (WEST), MANGLES ROAD, PATNA 7. THE ASSISTANT ELECTRICAL ENGINEER (REVENUE), H.T. BILLING, WEST CIRCLE, PATNA ELECTRIC SUPPLY UNDERTAKING, MANGLES ROAD, PATNA. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr.Suraj Samdarshi. For the Board : Mr.Anand Kr. Ojha 2 8.3.2010 Petitioner has a rice mill and has a H.T.S- I electric connection from the respondent- Board. It commenced production as certified by the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Patna with effect from 20th April, 2007. It grievances are that the promises and assurance, as contemplated under the Industrial Incentive Policy Bihar, 2006, in respect of certain incentive regarding electricity consumption has not been extended to it and yet it is being coerced to pay the bill. Petitioner represented to the authorities without result. 2 Under the threat of disconnection, petitioner was forced to file this writ petition. A counter affidavit has been filed in which virtually the stand of the petitioner has been accepted. The only exception is that the Board would like to verify whether petitioner‟s rice mill is a rice huller or a rice seller. In my view that would be wholly necessary inasmuch as the certificate granted by the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Patna, clearly states that the licence to establish the rice mill is only for „ Arwa Chawal‟ i.e. distinct from boiled rice, which is manufactured in huller. Be that as it may, it is open to the Board to get a clarification from the District Industries Centre in that regard. In my view, petitioner having been established in the year 2007, after the industrial policy came into being and it being a rice mill based on seller “Arwa Chawal” it is entitled to the incentive, as claimed for, subject to final clarification which the department may give to the Board, I direct that (i) since the very beginning petitioner is not entitled to charge electricity duty and (ii) it is not liable to charge with any MMG/AMG, both with regard to unit charges and with regard to the demand charges. Board would be obliged to revise all the bills accordingly. Future bills of the petitioner would be subject to adjustment as per the said revision as apparently right from beginning has been denied the said incentive and has been wrongly charged accordingly. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ 3 petition stands disposed of. Singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)