Bhupatbhai Satabhai Zalu vs Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd
2023 Latest Caselaw 2018 Guj

     C/SCA/3256/2023                             ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

             R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3256 of 2023

==========================================================
                          BHUPATBHAI SATABHAI ZALU
                                    Versus
                       PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BHARAT T RAO(697) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR VIRAL J DAVE(5751) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
                  Date : 02/03/2023
                   ORAL ORDER

Mr Bharat T. Rao, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, at the outset, invited the attention of this Court to the judgment of this Court in the case of Jayshree Talkies vs. Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited reported in 2018 (3) GCD 2193. It is submitted that while interpreting the Regulation 7.6.5 of the Electricity Supply Code and Related Matter (First Amendment) Regulations, 2005, it has been held and observed that inbuilt mechanism has been provided in the regulation itself to provide opportunity to the consumer before supplementary bill is raised.

2. It is submitted that in the present case, before issuing the supplementary bill, no hearing was accorded to the petitioner and therefore, only on this limited ground, the supplementary bill issued, deserves to be quashed and set aside. Nonetheless, the petitioner without prejudice to his rights and contentions, undertakes to make the payment of Rs.11,85,956.88 ps., but in installments. It is therefore, urged that the supplementary bill, be quashed and set aside and the petitioner, be relegated to the authority to hear the

C/SCA/3256/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023

petitioner and issue the fresh supplementary bill in accordance with law.

3. Mr Viral J. Dave, learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.3, could not dispute the proposition laid down in the judgment of this Court in the case of Jayshree Talkies (supra).

4. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.

5. The Division Bench in the aforesaid judgment of Jayshree Talkies (supra), in paragraph 24, has held and observed thus:-

"[24] From a reading of Regulation 7.6.5 of the Regulations of 2005, it is clear that it is inbuilt, in the regulation itself to provide pportunity to the consumer before supplementary bill is raised. In case of theft of energy, respondent authorities cannot unilaterally assess loss of energy for a maximum period of 12 months in all cases without giving any opportunity. Further it is clear that civil liability determined is subject to orders of the Special Court under Section 154(5) of the Electricity Act. If any amount is deposited by the consumer which is excess of civil liability to be determined by the Special Court, such amount is required to be refunded to the consumer under Section 154(6) of the Electricity Act of 2003."

6. It is not in dispute that prior to the issuance of supplementary bill, no hearing was accorded to the petitioner and therefore, the issuance of the supplementary bill would be against the principle laid down by the Court in the aforesaid judgment. Therefore, the petition, deserves to be allowed and is accordingly allowed.

7. The petitioner, shall deposit 30% of the amount of supplementary bill within a period of four weeks' from today together with re-connection charges. Immediately upon deposit of the said amount, the respondent shall restore the power supply to

C/SCA/3256/2023 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023

the units of the petitioner within a period of one week thereafter. Once the petitioner makes the payment of 30% of the amount, the Deputy Engineer, Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd., shall take a decision after hearing the petitioner within a period of six weeks' therefrom. The petitioner shall continue to pay the remaining amount towards the supplementary bill in six monthly installments and shall not default in making the aforesaid payment.

8. Let the undertaking be filed with this Court on or before 06.03.2023 stating that the petitioner, shall deposit the amount towards the supplementary bill, as agreed.

9. In view of the above, the supplementary bill dated 30.01.2023, issued by the Deputy Engineer (O & M), Paliyad Sub- Division Office, Botad, is quashed and set aside. The petition, stands disposed of. No order as to costs.

(SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J) BINOY B PILLAI