IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.249 of 2005 SIDHESHWAR NATH, SON OF LATE RANG BAHADUR LAL, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA NEW JAKKANPUR, P.S. JAKKANPUR, DISTT. PATNA. Versus 1. THE CHAIRMAN BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 2. THE ELECTRICAL SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PESU, (WEST) MANGLES ROAD, PATNA. 3. THE ELECTRICAL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, GARDANIBAGH DIVISION, PESU, PATNA. 4. THE ASSISTANT ELECTRICAL ENGINEER(REVENUE) GARDANIBAGH DIVISION, PESU, PATNA. ----------- 04. 13.01.2010 Counsel for the petitioner and the Bihar State Electricity Board(hereinafter referred to as “the Board) are in agreement that Vidyut Adalat was not in existence when C.W.J.C. No.9368 of 2003 was disposed of under orders dated 29.4.2005 directing the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy before the Vidyut Adalat. In view of the fact that the Vidyut Adalat was/is not in existence direction given to the petitioner to avail the remedy before the said Adalat could not be complied with and order dated 29.4.2005 has to be recalled, which is, accordingly, recalled. The review application is disposed of and C.W.J.C. No.9368 of 2003 is taken up for admission. During the hearing of the writ application, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the writ petitioner availed the offer of one time settlement pursuant to scheme formulated by the Board and has made payment with delayed surcharge of the impugned bill(s). In view of the fact that payment pursuant to the impugned bill(s) has been made, the prayer made in this writ application has become infructuous, which is accordingly, dismissed as infructuous. Rajesh/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)