Gujarat High Court
Deputy Engineer, Madhya Gujarat ... vs Haresh K Shah on 9 February, 2023
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
C/SCA/9400/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/02/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9400 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3204 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9406 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9408 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9410 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9412 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9414 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9416 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9401 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9402 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9403 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9418 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9419 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9404 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9405 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9407 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9409 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9413 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9445 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9446 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9451 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9454 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9465 of 2021
Page 1 of 7
Downloaded on : Fri Feb 10 20:49:56 IST 2023
C/SCA/9400/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/02/2023
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9466 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9471 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9472 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9473 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9474 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9475 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9476 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9477 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9415 of 2021
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
DEPUTY ENGINEER, MADHYA GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.
Versus
HARESH K SHAH
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR CHINMAY M GANDHI(3979) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS NIKITA C GANDHI(11570) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS RUMI M GANDHI(3472) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR.ROHAN SHAH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
Page 2 of 7
Downloaded on : Fri Feb 10 20:49:56 IST 2023
C/SCA/9400/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/02/2023
MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
Date : 09/02/2023
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr.Chinmay Gandhi learned advocate for
the petitioners and Mr.Rathin Raval learned
advocate for respondent no.1 and Mr.Rohan
Shah learned AGP for the respondent State.
2. By way of these petitions under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India, the challenge by
the petitioner-Madhya Gujarat Vij Company
Limited is to the orders passed by the Appellate
Authority respectively by which appeals filed by
the respondent consumers have been allowed.
3. For the purposes of this judgement, facts of
Special Civil Application No.3204 of 2021 need
to be considered.
C/SCA/9400/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/02/2023
4. It was a case of the electricity company that on
checking done on 27.01.2020, the respondents
were found to be using electricity connections
unauthorizedly, a provisional bill was therefore
given on 30.01.2020 and admittedly the final
assessment was done within a period of 30 days
on 28.02.2020. The Appellate Authority was
approached by filing appeal on 12.06.2020.
Perusal of the order would indicate that the case
of the respondent before the Appellate Authority
was that the premises were used for residential
purpose and that there was no unauthorized use
of electricity.
5. Mr.Rathin Raval learned counsel appearing for
the respondent no.1 would submit that since the
orders are in the nature of similar facts as
recorded in the matters decided today in Special
Civil Application No.7979 of 2021 and allied
C/SCA/9400/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/02/2023
matters, there is no reason to interfere with the
order of the Appellate Authority.
6. A perusal of the order of the Appellate Authority
when read in terms of the assessment of
evidence and the provisions of the Electricity
Act, 2003 viz. 126(3) and 126(4) thereof, there is
no discussion on the aspect of whether there was
any breach of the provisions of the supply code
viz. specially clauses 7.29 and 7.46 thereof which
were reproduced by the order of the Appellate
Authority and are, for the benefit of the order,
read as under:
"7.29 The report shall be signed by the
Authorized Officer / Accessing officer, each
member of the inspection team and by the
consumer fails to sing the report, then the
same has to be recorded in the inspection
report and the report must be handed over
to the consumer or his / her representative
at site immediately under proper receipt. In
case of refusal by the consumer or his / her
representative to either accept or give a
receipt, a copy of inspection report shall be
pasted at a conspicuous place in / outside
C/SCA/9400/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/02/2023
the premises and photographed
simultaneously the report shall be sent to
the consumer under Registered Post / Speed
Post on the same day or the next day of the
inspection.
...
7.46 Reclassification of consumer category:
If it is found that a consumer has been
classified in a particular category
erroneously or any order of reduction or
enhancement of Contract Demand has been
obtained, the Distribution Licensee may
reclassify him under appropriate Category
offer issuing notice (With minimum notice
period of thirty days) to him to execute a
fresh Agreement on the basis of the altered
reclassification or modified contract
demand."
7. After recording of the respective contentions, the
Appellate Authority has without any detailed
discussion allowed the appeal. This is a case
which is one that cannot be compared to the
group decided earlier on this date inasmuch as
here admittedly, the assessment orders are
within the period of 30 days in accordance with
Section 126 of the Act.
C/SCA/9400/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/02/2023
8. For the aforesaid reasons, the orders of the
Appellate Authority are set aside only on the
ground of being without reasons. The orders of
the Appellate Authority in the respective
petitions of the respective dates are hereby
quashed and set aside. The proceedings are
remanded to the respective Appellate Authority
to decide them afresh on the basis of the
material available on record with the liberty to
the parties to take the contentions that are
available to them in accordance with law.
9. The Appellate Authority on remand shall decide
the matter afresh within six months from the
date of receipt of coy of this order.
10. All these petitions are partly allowed.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)
ANKIT SHAH
