IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12356 of 2011 Umesh Sao Son of late Ram Dheyan Sao resident of Village Khadiha P.S. Parsa Bazar District- Patna. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road through its Chairman. 2. The General-cum-Chief Engineer, Patna Electric Supply under taking, Mangles Road, Patna. 3. The Electrical Superintending Engineer, Patna Electric Supply under taking Patna. 4. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Awar pramandal Punpun. 5. The Assistant Engineer, Electric Supply Awar Pramandal Punpun. ----------- 2. 05.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anand Ojha learned counsel on behalf of the Bihar State Electricity Board. The writ petition has been filed seeking a direction that the representation filed by the petitioner before the Assistant Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Sub-Division, Punpun be disposed off by a reasoned order or in the alternative the petitioner may be allowed to file a fresh representation before the competent authority who may consider the exorbitant demands raised against the petitioner with regard to the allegation of theft of electricity. Without going into the merits of the case at this stage, this Court feels that it would suffice if a direction is given to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Assistant Electric Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Punpun with regard to his grievances including that of calculation of the amount recoverable. If such representation is filed the said authority 2 shall consider the same in accordance with law after ignoring the earlier representation filed by the petitioner as well as keeping in mind the ground reality including the fact that the petitioner is a B.P.L. card holder and thus it is beyond his capacity to pay the amount. This Court would only indicate that the authority cannot be asked or compelled to order beyond its jurisdiction or power but if there is any power or jurisdiction available with the authority to give relief to the petitioner after being satisfied with his submission and the facts available on record or which may be gathered from the attending circumstances then such discretion may be exercised in favour of the petitioner after being satisfied that it is needed for the ends of justice since the law provides such discretion to the authority only to take care of such exigencies. Learned counsel for the respondent Electricity Board has submitted that since the case is one of electric theft it is covered by the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003 and the authorities are bound by the said Act. Be that as it may, the said authority shall consider the representation filed by the petitioner strictly in accordance with law keeping in mind the observations made above. The writ petition stands disposed off. Anand Kr. ( Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)