IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7039 of 2004 SATYA NARAIN SAH @ SATYA NARYA Sahu R/o Mohalla Gachi Tola, P.S. Begusarai, District Begusarai…….Petitioner. Versus 1. THE SECRETARY,BIHAR ELECTRICIT Board, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Chairman, Bihar Electricity Board, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Executive Engineer, Electricity Board, urban Electric Supply Division, Begusarai 4. The Assistant Engineer, Electricity Board, Urban Electric Supply Division, Begusarai. 5. The Juniot Engineer, Electricity Board Urban Electric Supply Division, Begusarai ….Respondents. ----------- 8 13.05.2011 Heard. 2. In compliance of order dated 5.4.2011, a supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents today in the court stating clearly in paragraph 3 that entire outstanding dues against the petitioner till February 2011 has already been paid by the him and no electrical dues shall be charged from the petitioner for the earlier period till February 2011. 3. This matter was heard earlier by a Bench of this Court on 27.2.2006 and a direction was issued to inspect the premises of the petitioner on 09th March 2006 to ascertain the efficiency of the meter installed there for recording the consumption of electricity by the petitioner. Matter was again heard at length on 5.4.2011 and by a detailed order, this Court has noticed that in compliance of order dated 27.2.2006 the premises of the petitioner was inspected by Electrical Executive Engineer, Begusarai, accompanied by other competent officials and found the meter in running condition. It was also contended 2 on behalf of the respondents that bills issued against the petitioner for previous periods have already been revised. 4. On the request made on behalf of the petitioner, the matter was adjourned and both sides were directed to file their fresh affidavits, so that the matter is finally disposed of. In the light of the aforesaid order a supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner and a supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. According to the respondents, the entire dues have been paid by the petitioner till February 2011, therefore, nothing remains to be decided by this Court. However, according to the petitioner, there has been some error in calculation of the arrears of electrical dues as also charging of D.P.S and, therefore, previous bills require rectification. 5. After having heard the parties, this Court comes to a conclusion that the major issues involved in the present proceeding stands concluded in view of the issuance of revised bills and payment of electrical dues by the petitioner till February 2011. Therefore, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending any longer before this Court. The respondents are hereby restrained from making any further demand with respect to the electrical consumption made by the petitioner for the earlier period till February 2011. The petitioner shall be obliged to pay the bills raised against him for the period from march 2011 and onwards. If the petitioner does 3 not make payment of current bill from march 2011 onwards, then respondents shall be at liberty to disconnect his electrical connection. 6. However, if the petitioner finds that there has been some wrong calculation about the previous bill, then he shall be at liberty to approach Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum constituted in terms of Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003. if such a representation/complaint is filed before the aforesaid forum within a period of four weeks from today with relevant materials , then that should be looked into and should be disposed of by the said forum in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, writ petition stands finally disposed of. Rahman/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)