IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2014 of 2007 SRI KRISHNA NAND THAKUR Versus THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ORS ----------- 02. 24-06-2008 Petitioner is a consumer having a domestic connection in his name. He has paid the bills raised by respondent Electricity Board . As and when the bill was raised it was always in a reasonable order but all of a sudden bill dated 13.3.2006, contained in Annexure-4, for the month of February, 2006 showing the bill of Rs.1,22,552/- has been raised. The bill also shows the arrear to the tune of Rs. 1,19,791/-. Obviously there is some error on the face of record. But since several efforts made by the petitioner upon approaching the Sub Division Officer as well as Superintending Engineer, Samastipur did not get any desired result, petitioner has had to file the present writ application . This Court finds it strange that a glaring infirmity on the face of the record which is causing acute distress to the petitioner is not being attended to by the responsible officers of the Electricity Board. One does not understand as to why one has to approach and seek a direction from the Court before the concerned authority responsible for the duty conferred upon him by virtue of holding such a public office responds. The Court does not view the inaction on the part of the respondent kindly. The Court does not want to express or record more than what has been stated above at this stage. Direction is, however, issued to the Superintending Engineer, Bihar State Electricity Board, Samastipur (respondent No.5) that he shall get - 2 - the matter verified and act upon the representation which has been filed by the petitioner way back on 2.9.2006 within a period of 8 weeks from the date of communication/production of a copy of this order and issue appropriate corrected bill in favour of the petitioner. He shall also get the matter verified as to how and under what circumstances the impugned arrear bill, contained in Annexure-4, came to be issued to the consumer of a domestic connection and that too for a month has been raised. This writ application stands allowed with the above direction and the impugned bill, contained in annexure-4, is quashed. rkp (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)