Gujarat High Court
Hotel City Palace vs Paschim Gujarat Vij Com Ltd & on 14 September, 2016
Author: A.J.Desai
Bench: A.J.Desai
C/SCA/8064/2008 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8064 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE :
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI Sd/-
=========================================
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be NO
allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO
3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair NO
copy of the judgment ?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial NO
question of law as to the interpretation of the
constitution of India, 1950 or any order made
thereunder ?
===========================================================
HOTEL CITY PALACE....Petitioner
Versus
PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COM LTD & 1....Respondents
=========================================
Appearance :
MR NIKHIL S KARIEL, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner.
MS LILU K BHAYA, ADVOCATE for the Respondents.
=========================================
CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI
Date : 14/09/2016
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. By way of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner - consumer has challenged the order dated 29.4.2008 passed by the Appellate Authority and Chief Electrical Inspector by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner Page 1 of 6 HC-NIC Page 1 of 6 Created On Fri Sep 16 02:07:09 IST 2016 C/SCA/8064/2008 JUDGMENT challenging the supplementary bill issued by the respondent Company on the ground of unauthorized use of electricity was dismissed.
2. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, Ms. Lilu K. Bhaya, learned advocate has appeared for the respondents. During the course of arguments, she has produced on record checking sheet dated 6.7.2006 as well as Laboratory test report dated 10.7.2006. The same are taken on record.
3. The brief facts of the case can be summarized as under :-
3.1. That the respondent Company is a licensee permitted to distribute electricity in certain parts of the State of Gujarat. The petitioner is a consumer of the Company who has entered into contract load of 89 KW with the electricity company. The meter which record consumption of electricity was installed at the premises of the petitioner on 5.5.2004. The meter was installed as per the provisions of the Electricity Act and details were incorporated in Proforma 15 upon which signature of the consumer was obtained.
3.2. On 6.7.2006, vigilance squad of the electricity company visited the hotel and examined the meter. On examining the same, the squad found that certain seals of the meter box and the meter itself were tampered. Hence, the meter was removed and sent for laboratory examination. The said process was undertaken by the Officer of the Company in presence of the representative of the petitioner who has put his signature on the checking report prepared on the same day i.e. 6.7.2006.Page 2 of 6
HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Fri Sep 16 02:07:09 IST 2016 C/SCA/8064/2008 JUDGMENT 3.3. Thereafter, on 10.7.2006, the meter was tested in the laboratory by the experts in presence of the representative of the petitioner. A detailed report was prepared by the Laboratory and number of irregularities were found when the meter was examined in detail i.e. from outside and inside. An objection was raised by the representative of the petitioner which was also recorded in the said report prepared on 10.7.2006 itself. Having found the case of malpractice, under Section 126 (6) of the Electricity Act, 2003, supplementary bill to the tune of Rs.11,64,819.44 was issued to the petitioner.
3.4. Being aggrieved by the said supplementary bill, the petitioner preferred appeal under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 before the Appellate Authority and Chief Electrical Inspector and raised several contentions.
3.5. The Appellate Authority and Chief Electrical Inspector vide impugned order dated 29.4.2008 dismissed the appeal of the petitioner.
3.6. Hence the present petition.
4. Mr. Nikhil S. Kariel, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner - consumer would submit that the Appellate Authority has not properly dealt with the Laboratory report. He would submit that the Appellate Authority has only considered the report in part, though the examination of the meter suggests that there was no tampering with different items of meter itself. He would submit that as per the said report, nothing was found within the meter body. Similarly, top cover button, wiring of terminal block of Page 3 of 6 HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Fri Sep 16 02:07:09 IST 2016 C/SCA/8064/2008 JUDGMENT the meter, current coil of the meter and dial fixing screw, train gear were found normal. He would further submit that even position of reverse lock, meter therm gear and terminal block of the meter were also found to be in proper condition. He, therefore, would submit that there was no material either with the Electricity company or with the Appellate Authority to come to the conclusion only on the ground that some seals were tampered, the consumer has allegedly committed unauthorized use of electricity. He would further submit that meter was 15 years old and, therefore, there are all possibilities that the paper seals which were found to be tampered would be the effect of the said period as well as weather of Dwarka which is situated on the seashore. He would further submit that there is no material with the electricity company that the meter has not recorded the correct consumption. He, therefore, would submit that the impugned order of the Appellate Authority is thus required to be quashed and set aside.
5. On the other hand, Ms. Lilu K. Bhaya, learned advocate appearing for the electricity company has vehemently opposed this petition and submitted that when the meter was installed in the year 2004, the entire procedure was undertaken by the authority and the meter was found in proper working condition. She would further submit that from the checking sheet which is produced on the record, it becomes clear that the paper seals of the meter were tampered with on 6.7.2006 when the checking squad visited the place. She would further submit that when the checking squad examined the meter box, it was found that PVC seals were tampered and, therefore, the meter was removed and sent for detailed examination at the Laboratory. She would further submit that the entire exercise was undertaken by the company in presence of the representative of the consumer who has put his Page 4 of 6 HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Fri Sep 16 02:07:09 IST 2016 C/SCA/8064/2008 JUDGMENT signature without any objection.
6. She would further submit that when the meter was examined in detail at the laboratory, that too in presence of the representative of the petitioner, number of irregularities were found. She would further submit that the seals which are ordinarily applied by the electricity company were not found in a condition when they were applied and male and female part of the seals were found tampered with. She would further submit that the metal meter body seal was also found tampered. The paper seals were also found cut and the wires applied to the seals were also found tampered. PVC seals were also found tampered. She would further submit that even the number which recorded the consumption of electricity were also found tampered and in the figures of reading series, there were scratches on the figures of 100 to 1,00,000. She, therefore, would submit that the above amply makes it clear that the petitioner had tampered with the meter and, therefore, the electricity company has rightly issued the supplementary bill. She would submit that all these aspects have been considered by the Appellate Authority and, therefore, there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order of the Appellate Authority. She, therefore, would submit that the petition be dismissed with costs.
7. I have heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, perused the impugned order, checking sheet dated 6.7.2006 and Laboratory report dated 10.7.2006. As far as the submission made by Mr. Kariel that the meter was 15 years old is concerned, it appears that the meter was installed on 5.5.2004 at the place of the petitioner wherein Proforma 15 was recorded and signature of the consumer was obtained. At that time, all the seals Page 5 of 6 HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Fri Sep 16 02:07:09 IST 2016 C/SCA/8064/2008 JUDGMENT were in normal position. Therefore, the submission made by Mr. Kariel cannot be accepted that because the seal was old, there are possibilities of discrepancies in the seals applied in the meter.
8. As far as the checking sheet dated 6.7.2006 is concerned, which is a detailed one, it is clear that two seals of base part and the top of the meter were found tampered. PVC seals were also found tampered. Therefore, the electricity company has rightly sent the meter for laboratory examination. The Laboratory report dated 10.7.2006 amply makes it clear that several seals were tampered with, male and female part of the seals were found tampered with, paper seals were also found tampered with and the numbers which record the consumption of electricity also was found tampered with. Therefore, in my opinion, the case is covered under Section 126 (6)(iii) of the Electricity Act, 2003.
9. I have also considered the reasoning of the Appellate Authority which has examined the case in detail. It is also pertinent to note that subsequent to the change of the meter, the consumption of the petitioner has gone three times higher than recorded earlier by old meter. Hence, I do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of fact arrived at by the Appellate Authority. Hence, the present petition is meritless and is accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated.
Sd/-
(A.J.DESAI, J.) Savariya Page 6 of 6 HC-NIC Page 6 of 6 Created On Fri Sep 16 02:07:09 IST 2016