IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA. CWP No. 968 of 2008 Date of Decision : June 25, 2008 Vivek Bhalla …Petitioner. Versus: HPSEB & others …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice R. B. Misra, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Advocate. For respondents 1 & 2 : Mr. Baldev Singh, Advocate. For respondent No.3 : Mr. R. M. Bisht, Dy. A. G. R. B. Misra, J. (Oral) In the present writ petition, prayer has been made to quash the order dated 19.6.2008 (Annexure P-24) passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, whereby a direction was issued to deposit 50% of the balance amount due i.e. Rs.3.5 lakh with respondent No.2 - Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board (in short called ‘HPSEB’), who may, thereupon, restore the electric connection of the petitioner subject to final decision in the matter. Further prayer has also been made to quash and set 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 aside the earlier orders dated 20.4.2006, 3.4.2006, 24.8.2006, 9.10.2006, 27.11.2006 & 17.3.2007. 2. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself. 3. The petitioner’s industry M/s. Delux Enterprises, Bharatgarh Road, Nalagarh (H.P.) is an establishment run as a partnership firm, where electricity check meter has been installed along with the regular meter to record the readings from time to time by the officials of ‘HPSEB’ followed by inspection dated 31.3.2005. In that respect a communication was sent to the petitioner on 4.4.2005 that the theft of energy has taken place in the petitioner’s unit. Electricity bill to the tune of Rs.5,57,978/- was issued on 8.4.2005 followed by another demand dated 30.4.2005 asking the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.9,07,795/-. By another communication dated 12.5.2005, respondent No.2 (Addl. Superintending Engineer, Electrical Division, HPSEB, Nalagarh, District Solan) has asked the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.12,07,795/- (including Rs.3 lakh already deposited). A show cause notice dated 20.4.2006 was issued to the petitioner indicating that he has been indulged in the theft of energy and in that respect assessment of quantum of energy stolen for the period was indicated and accordingly demand of Rs.41.07 lakhs was created. It appears at the instance of the petitioner, the said 3 demand was rectified and a demand notice of Rs.21,22,379/- was created. 4. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred a Writ Petition No. 447/2005. The said writ petition was allowed on 28.6.2005 with certain directions. It appears the petitioner had deposited Rs.15,07,795/- out of the said amount of Rs.21,22,379/- and remaining amount of Rs.7,14,584/- was directed to be deposited in respect of the notice dated 17.3.2007. It appears subsequently the petitioner preferred Writ Petition No. 1308/2006, which however was disposed of vide order dated 23.4.2008 indicating that the petitioner is at liberty to file a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority. Consequent upon, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 against the order passed by respondent No.2 (Assessing Officer) under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, whereby the petitioner was directed to deposit the amount as calculated by the Assessing Officer. 5. The Divisional Commissioner while entertaining Misc. Appeal No. 95/2008 has observed vide order dated 19.6.2008 that the Commissioner is not empowered to adjudicate the said appeal as the same has to be adjudicated by the Principal Secretary (MPP & Power) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. Divisional Commissioner has also observed to transfer the said appeal to the said authority. However, in the impugned order dated 19.6.2008, the Divisional Commissioner, has on one 4 hand indicated that as per the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003, the petitioner has to deposit 50% of the balance amount due i.e. Rs.3.5 lakhs with the HPSEB, where after the HPSEB shall immediately restore the electric connection to the business premises of the petitioner. 6. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has already deposited the due amount and has already deposited more than 50% of the demanded amount of electric due, as such, there is no necessity to demand Rs.3.5 lakhs to the HPSEB for getting restoration of the electric connection. The fact of depositing of more than 50% of the electric dues has not been denied in the absence of lack of otherwise instructions to the learned counsel appearing for the respondents - HPSEB. 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 8. In the facts and circumstances, we find that the petitioner may get his Misc. Appeal No.95/2008 adjudicated upon before the appropriate authority i.e. Principal Secretary (MPP & Power) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, however, there shall not be any necessity to deposit any additional amount for consideration of the said appeal on merits and the HPSEB shall have to restore the electric connection of the petitioner forthwith. 5 9. We are not making any observation in respect of the exact amount of quantum due or deposited by the petitioner and we are not making any observation on the merits of the case. Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed with the observations that the impugned order dated 19.6.2008 is not legally sustainable. The impugned order dated 19.6.2008 is, therefore, partly set aside to the extent that in the operative part indication to petitioner to deposit 50% of balance amount due i.e. Rs.3.5 lakhs with HPSEB for restoration of electric connection, is treated as redundant. The said appeal No. 95/2008 shall be disposed of expeditiously by the concerned appropriate authority in accordance with the provisions of law. In view of the above observations, writ petition is partly allowed. CMP No.1480/2008 In view of the above observations, this CMP is disposed of. Copy dasti on usual terms. ( R. B. Misra ), Judge. ( Sanjay Karol ), Judge. June 25, 2008 (rana)