IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19902 of 2011 M/S Kisan Sewa Cold Storage Bazar Samiti, Bahadurpur, Rajendra Nagar, Patna Through Its Director, Sitaram Yadav, S/O Shri Triveni Rai, R/O Musallapur Bazar, P.O. & P.S.- Bahadurpur, Distt.- Patna Versus 1. 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, Pesu, Mangles Road, Patna 4. The Electrical Superintending Engineer, Pesu East, Shivalaya Market, Ashok Rajpath, Patna 5. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Supply, Rajendra Nagar, Patna 6. The Assistant Electrical Engineer, Supply Rajendra Nagar, Patna ---------------------------------- 2 25.11.2011. Heard Mr Suraj Samdarshi for the petitioner and Mr Anand Kr.Ojha for the Electricity Board. The petitioner is a Cold storage of BISCOMAUN having a contract demand for 134 KVA bearing Account no.183253 under high tension category. A case of theft of electricity was registered vide FIR bearing Bahadurpur Police Station Case No. 87 of 2011 under section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 was instituted alleging loss of Rs. 55,84,523/-. On 24.10.2011 the petitioner entered into an agreement with the Board for payment of the alleged loss on instalments, subject to the result of final assessment on which date he deposited a sum of Rs. 15,57,867/-. The balance 75% of the loss was to be deposited in four equal monthly instalments. The petitioner submits that on account of financial crunch he could not deposit the 1st instalment of Rs. 12 lakhs in time. 2 Nonetheless, he submits that he is willing to deposit further 25% within a short time and has prayed for extension of time in this regard. He submits that even for filing appeal, he is required to deposit 50% of the alleged loss, as such, he is willing to deposit rest 25% of the due amount. Counsel for the Board submits that the petitioner had himself entered into agreement and had deposited 25% of the loss consequent to which his electric connection had been resumed as per the provisions of agreement. The petitioner ought to have deposited 25% of the remaining 75% amount in four equal monthly instalments. He submits that the petitioner has defaulted in making due payment of instalment. He further submits that the provisional assessment order has been served upon the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner replies that he would be preferring objection under section 126(3) of the Electricity Act immediately. In view of the submissions of the petitioner that he would deposit 25% of the 75% of balance money as per agreement, the time period is extended by way of last indulgence within further period of five weeks. The petitioner would abide by the order passed under section 126(3) of the Electricity Act and appeal if any preferred under section 127 of the Electricity Act. In case the petitioner fails to deposit the amount as above, the Board would be at liberty to disconnect the electric 3 connection. Till then the Board is restrained from disconnection of energy supplied to the petitioner. The petitioner would pay the remaining 50% of the amount in six equal monthly instalments. Subject to the result of the assessment. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)