ANWAR AUTO WORKS vs SECRETARY HPSEB

THIS appeal is directed against the order of the District Forum, Mandi, dated 29.7.1999 whereby the District Forum has allowed the complaint insofar as the claim under the bill, in dispute, is beyond three years and time-barred.

ADMITTEDLY, the appellant/complainant (hereinafter to be referred to as the complainant) has taken industrial electricity connection from the respondents/opposite parties (hereinafter to be referred to as the Electricity Board) for running an industry and the Electricity Board has been charging electricity at the rate prescribed for running industry and not for commercial purpose. There is no dispute that the tariff for commercial purpose is higher than the tariff meant for industrial purpose. It appears that the audit party audited the accounts of Electrical Sub-Division, Ner Chowk from April, 1995 to March, 1998 and in the audit report, the audit party has pointed out that the complainant was using the electricity connection for commercial purpose, whereas the electric connection had been given by the Electricity Board for industrial purpose only and on that basis, the Electricity Board raised a bill of Rs. 21,448.35 which includes the arrears for more than 3 years of an amount of Rs. 19,155/-, at the higher rates of tariff meant for commercial purpose for the period from 24.1.1999 to 22.2.1999 which has been challenged by complainant in this complaint.

There is further no dispute that the electricity connection was given to the complainant by the Electricity Board for industrial purpose only and not for commercial purpose and that merely on the basis of the audit report, the Electricity Board has issued the impugned bill from 24.1.1999 to 22.2.1999 on the basis of tariff prescribed for commercial purpose. It is further not in dispute that the Competent Authority have not investigated the matter whether the report given by the Audit Authorities is correct and that the electric connection is being used by the complainant for commercial purpose and not for industrial purpose for which the electricity connection was originally given. Since the charge of higher rate of tariff for commercial purposes involves civil consequences, the complainant is required to be given show cause notice to enable him to substantiate that the electricity connection in fact is being used by them for industrial purpose only and not for commercial purpose in consonance with the principles of natural justice. In the absence of such notice, we are of the firm opinion that the bill at the commercial tariff could not have been raised by the Electricity Board, more particularly when they themselves have been charging the bills earlier at the rate of tariff prescribed for industrial purpose. Therefore, without holding enquiry into the matter, we are unable to sustain the bill of Rs. 21,448.35 issued by the Electricity Board with effect from 24.1.1999 to 22.2.1999 and it is liable to be quashed. However, it will be open for the Electricity Board to enquire into the matter after giving show-cause notice the complainant to investigate whether the electricity connection given to him is being used for industry or for other commercial purpose. In case, the Electricity Board comes to the conclusion that it is being used for commercial purpose after holding an enquiry into the matter, they shall give another revised bill to the complainant.

IN the light of what is discussed above, appeal is allowed and the order of the District Forum is set aside and that the impugned bill amounting to Rs. 21,448.35 for the period from 24.1.1999 to 22.2.1999 is also quashed and set aside. There is no order as to costs. Appeal allowed.