IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15094 of 2011 M/S Kanti Prabha Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. (Fruits & Vegetable Storage), A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of Campanies Act Having Its Registered Office At Brahampura, Laxmichowk, P.O. M.I.T., Distt. Muzaffarpur Through Its Authorized Representative Parmod Kumar, S/O Shri Nagendra Sah, R/O M/H Brahmpura, Laxmi Chowk, P.O. M.I.T. P.S. Brahampura, Distt.-Muzaffarpur. Versus 1. The Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna Through Its Chairman. 2. The Chief Engineer (Commercial), Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 3. The General Manager Cum Chief Engineer, Tirhut Area Electricity Board, Muzaffarpur. 4. The Electrical Superintending Engineer, Electrical Circle, Muzaffarpur. 5. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Muzaffarpur Electric Supply Division, Muzaffarpur. 6. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Mrt, Muzaffarpur. 7. The Assistant Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Division, S.K.M.C.H., Muzaffarpur. ---------------------------------- 3 28/09/2011. IA No.6409 of 2011 has been filed for restoration of electric line and for adding the same to the reliefs sought in the main writ petition. In fact, the petitioner filed instant writ petition for installing the check meter in his premises in terms of clause 8.15 of the Bihar Electricity Supply Code, 2007 and for not taking any coercive steps without getting the aforesaid meter tested through a check meter. It appears that the electric line of the petitioner has been disconnected on basis of the First Information Report, namely, Gaighat Police station case no. 210/2011, wherein it has been alleged that the petitioner committed theft of electricity causing loss to the tune of Rs. 10,86,038/-. 2 The petitioner submits that the allegation of theft is false and in fact respondents did not follow the procedure provided in the Electricity Rules. It is further submitted that the respondent-Board has raised punitive bill only when the petitioner had filed this writ application. As the petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing his objection, I do not propose to keep the matter pending. The petitioner would be at liberty to file an objection/appeal. Pending adjudication of the objection/appeal, preferred by the petitioner if any, he would deposit 40% of the punitive bill in following time frame:- i) 1st 15% would be deposited within two weeks. ii) Next 15% would be deposited within further four weeks. iii) Remaining 10% would be deposited within further four weeks. On depositing 1st instalment, electric connection of the petitioner would be restored with a new meter. The writ petition stands disposed of. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)