Allahabad High Court
M/S Rizavi Food Product A.Nagar Through ... vs U.P.Power Corp. Through Its M.D. ... on 30 July, 2010
Author: Pradeep Kant
Bench: Pradeep Kant, Ritu Raj Awasthi
Court No.1 Writ Petition No.7268(M/B) of 2010 M/s Rizavi Food Product Vs. U.P. Power Corporation and others. Hon'ble Pradeep Kant, J.
Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner raised a plea that for want of deposit of compounding fee as provided under Section 152 of the Act, the electricity connection of the petitioner can not be disconnected. Section 152, which provides for compounding of offence makes it the choice of the person concerned, either to go for compounding or to face trial. There can not be a compulsion on his part to pay the compounding fee and avoid prosecution.
The criminal liability which is fixed under the Act would not permit the corporation to disconnect the electricity. Disconnection of electricity can be made on the ground of default in payment of electricity dues, or in a case of theft or unauthorized use of electricity etc, as per the rules.
The impugned order mentions the fact that at the time of raid/ inspection the petitioner furnished a cheque of a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards the compounding fee but before the cheque could be encashed, he wrote a letter to the bank stopping the payment of the aforesaid cheque, therefore, the electricity connection has been directed to be disconnected, that too after giving an opportunity to the petitioner for depositing the amount of Rs.10,00,000/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the petitioner just to avoid arrest and harassment under compulsion, has issued the cheque, on the date of inspection though he is not willing to get the compounding done.
The disconnection, since can not be ordered for not depositing the compounding fee, and the electricity connection of the petitioner has yet not been disconnected by the corporation, therefore, there is no necessity of passing of a restraint order to this effect.
Learned counsel for the respondent submits, that provisional assessment under Section 126 has already been made, and final assessment shall be done very soon, subject to cooperation of the petitioner. He further says that the amount of provisional assessment is of a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- and odd.
We, under the circumstances, protecting the interest of both the parties provide that in case the petitioner deposits an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- within one week from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, the electricity connection of the petitioner-firm, shall not be disconnected.
The proceedings of final assessment shall be finalized by the date fixed, which we are informed is 12.08.2010 and if it is not possible to finalise on the said date, the same shall be made positively within next 15 days. In case the petitioner does not co- operate in the proceedings of assessment, the respondents will be at liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
The amount so deposited by the petitioner shall be adjusted towards the final assessment made and it shall not be treated as compounding fee.
With the aforesaid liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of finally.
30.7.2010 Prajapati/-