G. S. Singhvi, J. - (1.) Whether the respondent, who was a consumer of electricity Suppl lied by Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board (for short, "the Board") (predecessor of appellant No. 1 herein) is liable to pay minimum charges in terms of second proviso to para 11 of agreement dated 21st September, 1998 read with Clause 17 (ii) of the Electricity Suppl ly (Consumers) Regulations, 1984 (for short, "the Regulations") after disconnection of the Suppl ly of electricity is the question which arises for consideration in this appeal.
(2.) The respondent had set up a factory at Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, which now forms part of the State of Uttarakhand for manufacture of PVC and EPDM rubber profiles for automobile vehicles. In 1990, the Board sanctioned electric connection of 400 KVA load for the respondents factory. Thereafter, as per the requirement of the Regulations, the respondent entered into an agreement with the Board. On 12th February, 1997, the respondent applied for an additional load of 200 KVA, which was duly sanctioned. As a sequel to this, fresh agreement was executed between the parties for the total load of 600 KVA. After one year and seven months, the respondent approached the Board for reduction of load from 600 KVA to 250 KVA. The competent authority of the Board accepted the respondents request, who then executed another agreement dated 21st September, 1998.
(3.) In May 1999, the Suppl ly of electricity to the respondents factory was discontinued at the latters request. After five months, the concerned Executive Engineer sent communication on 5.10.1999 to the respondent requiring it to pay Rs.6,13,592/-towards minimum charges for six months. This was followed by notice dated 4.5.2000 and recovery certificate dated 4.8.2000 issued under Sections 3 and 5 respectively of the U.P. Government Electricity Undertakings (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1958 (for short, "the 1958 Act".;