Orissa High Court
Ranjib Biswal vs Tp Central Odisha Distribution ..... ... on 13 February, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.4077 of 2025
Ranjib Biswal ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Biswajit Nayak
-versus-
TP Central Odisha Distribution ..... Opposite Parties
Limited & Ors.
Represented By Adv. -
L.K. Moharana, Adv.
for the TPCODL
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
13.02.2025 Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the Opposite Parties-TPCODL. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with a prayer to quash the final assessment notice dated 26.12.2024 under Annexure-4 by holding the same to be in violation of the principal of natural justice as well as contrary to the provision contained in the Electricity Act, 2003.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that the said notice reveals that as per the final assessment done after Page 1 of 3. hearing on 20.12.2024, the Petitioner is liable to pay an amount of Rs.25,975/- towards the outstanding electricity dues. He further contended that the assessment of the electricity dues can only be done in exercise of power under Section 126 of the Electricity Act and that too after due compliance of the provisions contained therein. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the notice dated 26.12.2024 is illegal and the same is not in conformity with the provisions under the Electricity Act, 2003.
5. Mr. L.K. Moharana, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties-TPCODL, on the other hand, submitted that the assessment has been done by following the due procedure under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Distribution Company contended that the order assessing the outstanding dues under Section 126 of the Electricity Act is an appealable order under Section 127 of the said Act. He further contended that in many similar cases this Court had permitted the Petitioner to approach the authority by filing a properly constituted appeal memo under Section 127 of the Act. On such grounds, Mr Moharana, learned counsel appearing for the TPCODL submitted that the present writ petition is not maintainable.
6. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the materials on record, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the application in terms of the provision contained in the Electricity Act, 2003. Accordingly, it is directed that on payment of 20% of the outstanding dues, the electricity connection to the Petitioner's premises shall not be disconnected. Thereafter, the Petitioner shall present the appeal memo within eight weeks from the date of such deposit along with Page 2 of 3. the balance 30% as is provided under Section 127(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003, along with an application with a prayer for condonation of delay. In such eventuality, the Appellate Authority shall consider the application of condonation of delay by taking a lenient view and keeping in view the poor financial condition of the Petitioner and on payment of balance statutory amount as provided under Section 127(2) of the Electricity Act, the appeal shall be entertained and disposed of by providing an opportunity of hearing and by passing a speaking and reasoned order as expeditiously as possible.
7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Anil
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Page 3 of 3.
Signed by: ANIL KUMAR
SAHOO
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa,
Cuttack, India
Date: 13-Feb-2025 18:33:25