Patna High CourtCWJC/10198/2013disposed

Gauri Shankar Sah v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-08-14Mr. Justice Samarendra Pratap Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10198 of 2013 ====================================================== Gauri Shankar Sah S/O Late Rajendra Sah R/O Mohalla- Tangaul, Purani Gandak Pool Ghat Road, P.S.- Town (Hazipur), District- Vaishali .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary Energy Department, Bihar, Patna

2. The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna

3. The General Manager Electric Supply Zone, Tirhut Area, Muzaffarpur

4. The Finance Controller-I Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna

5. The Deputy Director Accounts, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna

6. The Executive Engineer Electric Supply Division, Hazipur, Vaishali

7. The Sub Divisional Officer, Electric Supply Division, Hazipur, Vaishali .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Shalini Rakut, AC to GA 1 Mr. Vijay kr.Verma, Advocate Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-08-2015 The petitioner prays to setting aside energy bill dated 9.3.2013 by which demand of Rs.4,86,485/- has been raised as arrears against Electric connection no. H6932 DS-II. The aforesaid bill includes the DPS of Rs.1,92,000/-. The petitioner submits that the meter was installed in his house on 20.4.1990. All of a sudden, after ten years energy bill of Rs. 26,59.62 was served. The petitioner made an objection to the same on 2.7.2001. However, no action was taken. Again after eleven to twelve years, bill dated 9.3.2013 was issued for a sum of Rs.4,26,485/- which included DPS amounting to Rs.1,92,000/- .case of the petitioner is that no bill was supplied from 1990 to

Patna High Court CWJC No.10198 of 2013 (2) dt.14-08-2015 2/2 2000, as such, respondents are not entitled to any DPS on the aforesaid amount. Again after twelve to thirteen years the impugned bill has been served, wherein the total amount raised is claimed as Rs.4,26,485/-.

Respondents have filed counter affidavit.

It goes without saying that the respondents are not entitled to charge DPS for the period they have not served bill earlier. The petitioner has also filed representation before the General Manager Electric Supply Zone, Tirhut Area, Muzaffarpur.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct that the respondents would restore the electric line of the petitioner on payment of Rs.50,000/- within a period of four weeks. The petitioner would file a fresh representation before respondent no.3 which would be disposed of within a period of two months.

The writ petition is thus disposed of.

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J) Shashi.