- (1.) (At the stage of Admission) The petitioner is challenging the action of the respondent in threatening to disconnect the power service connection for the non-payment of the bill for November, 1993 pursuant to the Telegram dated 14-12-1993 issued by the respondent. The case of the petitioner is that certain amount by way of interest is due from the Electricity Board in respect of the excess amount of about Rs. 10 lakhs collected towards the cost of pilfered energy in April, 1991. The petitioner submits that the refund of the excess amount has become due by reason of the Chief Engineer allowing the appeal on 14-10-1993. The petitioner submits that he made a demand for payment of the interest on 14-11-1993 and when there was no response from the Electricity Board, the petitioner adjusted the amount from out of the consumption charges bill of November, 1993. The learned Counsel for Respondent disputes the liability of the Board to pay interest on the amount in question.
(2.) I do not think that the petitioner has any legal right to unilaterally adjust the amount of interest alleged to be due to him against the consumption charges bill of November, 1993. There is no such right of adjustment either under a statutory provision or terms and conditions of supply or under general law. The disputed claim has to be adjudicated upon by a competent Court. The petitioner may have a valid ground to approach the Civil Court seeking for a decree to grant interest. Whether or not any interest is due in the circumstances of the case or according to law is a matter to be more appropriately decided by the Civil Court and I do not see any reason to entertain this Writ Petition so as to adjudicate the civil claim for the recovery of interest. Hence, I dismiss the Writ Petition without expressing any view on the question whether the petitioner has a legal right to get interest over the excess amount collected. However, in view of the fact that the possibility of the petitioner having acted on a bona fide impression that the interest amount could be adjusted against the current month's bill cannot be ruled out and the hardship that may be caused to the petitioner by the sudden disconnection, I consider it just and proper to direct that no coercive action shall be taken for the collection of the billed amount for November, 1993 for a period of one month from today.
(3.) The writ petition is dismissed subject to the above direction and observations.;