Kamlaben Manohar Bishnoi vs Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company Ltd.
2021 Latest Caselaw 15328 Guj

     C/SCA/13616/2021                                  ORDER DATED: 29/09/2021




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

             R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13616 of 2021

==========================================================
                       KAMLABEN MANOHAR BISHNOI
                                 Versus
                    DAKSHIN GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.
==========================================================
Appearance:
GAURAV D NANAVATI(8651) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
KHYATI A CHUGH(10132) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR. PARTH H BHATT(6381) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
                  Date : 29/09/2021
                   ORAL ORDER

Heard Ms. Khyati Chugh, learned advocate for Mr. Parth H. Bhatt, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner.

2. While inviting the attention of this Court to the inspection sheet dated 07.08.2021, it is submitted that item nos.3 and 4 clearly say that the cable is intact and no tampering has been done with the cable. It is submitted that the laboratory report prepared by the officers of the respondent have given a contrary finding to the effect that there is tampering in the meter. It is further submitted that the inspection was carried out around 3:25 in the afternoon and in the evening the petitioner was served with the supplementary bill. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner is challenging the issuance of the supplementary bill on three counts that: (1) it has been issued without offering any opportunity of hearing; (2) no proper procedure has been observed by the authority and (3) that there is a contradiction in the report page 32 vis-a-vis page 30D.

3.     Mr.    Dipak     Dave,   learned     Advocate    appearing         for    the






       C/SCA/13616/2021                                  ORDER DATED: 29/09/2021

respondent has submitted that it would not be permissible to the petitioner to approach straightaway this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India inasmuch as, an inbuilt mechanism has been provided of filing an application before the Special Court constituted under the provisions of Section 153 of the Act of 2003. Reliance in placed on the CAV judgment dated 26.02.2021 passed in Special Civil Application No. 20000 of 2018. It is submitted that this Court, did not entertain the petition and relegated the petitioner therein to file an application before the Special Court.

4. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties.

5. Pertinently this Court in the case of Jayshree Talkies vs. Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. rendered in LPA No. 616 of 2018 has held that in case of theft of electricity after disconnecting power it would not be permissible to the respondent authority unilaterally to make assessment without giving any notice to the consumer and issue supplementary bill. Para 22 of the said CAV Judgment reads thus:

"[22] The short question which arise for consideration in this appeal is whether in case of theft of electricity after disconnecting power, can the respondent authority unilaterally make assessment without giving any notice to the consumer and issue supplementary bill?. In our opinion, it cannot be."

6. Having regard to the submissions, issue notice returnable on 11.10.2021.

7. Direct service is permitted.

(SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J) BINOY B PILLAI