IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 137 OF 2008 MR. JOSE MARIO D'SOUZA ... Petitioner Versus CHIEF ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, PANAJI AND 5 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. R. S. Sardessai, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Mr. S. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Mr. B. Bandekar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 ,2,5 and 6. Coram:- R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. Date:- 17th March, 2008 P.C.:- The learned Advocate General states that the Petitioner has not paid the sum of Rs.300/- till this date which otherwise he was liable to pay and therefore no supply was provided to the Petitioner. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has fairly conceded that a sum of Rs.300/- is due and payable to the Department. However, he has disputed the claim of the Respondent No.1 that no electricity supply was released to the Petitioner. Be that as it may, the learned Advocate General states that on payment of Rs.300/- by the Petitioner, the electricity supply would be released. The petition can be disposed of by issuing the following direction:- The Petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.300/- to the concerned Department and on payment of such amount, the Respondent No.1 to release the electricity supply to the Petitioner's establishment forthwith subject to compliance of all terms and conditions. Petition accordingly stands disposed of. R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR, J. N. A. BRITTO, J. RD.