IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14303 of 2008 SATYESH KUMAR SON OF VISHWANATH PANDEY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NISARPURA P.S. NAUBATPUR, DISTT- PATNA. … PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT ENERGY GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE SECRETARY ENERGY DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN VIDHYUT BHAWAN BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 4. THE CHAIRMAN BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA VIDYUT BHAWAN BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 5. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER VIDYUT ANCHAL PATNA DISTT. PATNA. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRIC SUPPLY DIVISION PATNA (RURAL) KHAGAUL DISTT. PATNA. 7. THE ASSTT. ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, ELECTRIC SUPPLY SECTION, NAUBATPUR DISTT. PATNA. … RESPONDENTS. ----------- 4. 08.12.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board). 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the provisional bill dated 29.7.2008, Annexure-16, whereunder with reference to the inspection report dated 18.7.2008 the provisional bill has been raised holding that petitioner was availing load of 16 H.P. Instead of the sanctioned load of 8 H.P. and he has been called upon to pay a sum of Rs.2,43,691.44. Against the impugned bill petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ petition in which an 2 interim order dated 15.10.2008 was passed asking him to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- within two weeks from 15.10.2008. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has already deposited the aforesaid amount and his connection has been restored. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the provisional bill and the inspection note has not taken into account the fact that connection was given to the petitioner with effect from 25.9.2006 but the provisional bill has been raised treating the connection from 1.1.2004. 3. Counsel for the Board submitted that aforesaid submission as also the other submissions about the sanctioned load should be considered by the Assessment Officer under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 in view of the statement made in the counter affidavit that the connection of the petitioner was sanctioned in 2003 itself. 4. Having heard counsel for the parties, I dispose of the writ petition directing the petitioner to deposit a further sum of Rs.21,000/- so as to make the deposit pursuant to the provisional bill to the tune of 50% of the demand and thereafter objection filed by the petitioner before the assessing authority raising the contentions noted above as also other 3 contentions which he wishes to make be considered by the Assessment Officer who should pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of receipt of the objection together with this order. The amount of Rs.20,000/- be deposited, as early as possible, in any case within one month from today. Ibrar/- ( V. N. Sinha, J.)