IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9278 of 2008 M/S HI-TECH ELECTRODES PVT.LTD,Gidha Growth Centre, Ara, District- Bhojpur, through its Director, Manish Agrawal, son of Shri Pradyumna Krishna Agrawal, resident of Mahavir Tola, P.O. & P.S. Navasdah Ara, District Bhojpur …………………… Petitioner Versus 1. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna, through its Chairman 2. The General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Central Area Electricity Board, Serpentine Road, Patna 3. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Ara Rural, District Bhojpur 4. The Assistant Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Ara Rural, District Bhojpur ………………….. Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Suraj Samdarshi, Advocate For the BSEB Board:- Mr. Prakash Kumar 3. 24.11.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Bihar State Electricity Board. The petitioner has come to this Court for a direction upon the respondent-authorities to re-energize the electric connection of the petitioner which was disconnected pursuant to the billing dispute between the parties and for a further direction to the authorities to issue supplementary bill in pursuance of the order dated 24.12.2007 passed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum constituted under Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and for consequential reliefs. At the outset learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent- authorities the purported revised bill as per the order dated 2 24.12.2007 of the Forum has been annexed as Annexure R/A amounting to Rs. 2,31,028/-. He further points out that in the details given in the said bill an amount of Rs. 86,410/- is on account of delayed payment surcharge. Learned counsel submits that in terms of the order dated 24.12.2007 (Annexure-9) the delayed payment surcharge was not to be leviable in which regard the Forum had referred to the decision of this Court in the case of M/S Gaya Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and others: 1995 (2) PLJR 715. Learned counsel for the Board, on the other hand, submits that only the DPS levied on MMG charges and Fixed charge and on other amounts paid by the petitioner but not given credit for by the Board have been held by the Forum as wrongly levied and accordingly the fresh bill has been issued. In the above circumstances, it is directed that the petitioner shall pay the amount raised under the revised bill of Rs. 2,31,028 after deducting Rs. 86,410/- levied on account of delayed payment surcharge within fifteen days from today. Along with the receipt showing such payment the petitioner shall file a representation before the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum within a further period of one week thereafter and the Forum shall after hearing the parties issue further direction as to whether any amount by way of DPS is payable by the petitioner or not. The petitioner shall also have liberty to raise any other objection to the said provisional revised bill before the Forum. Any further 3 payment made by the petitioner shall be subject to the decision of the Forum. Immediately upon the amount being paid by the petitioner within fifteen days from today as directed above, the Board shall restore the electrical connection to the petitioner. The writ application is accordingly disposed of in terms of the aforesaid direction. S.Pandey (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)