- (1.) HEARD Shri vishal dixit on behalf of the petitioner and Shri Kapil Mishra learned Counsel for the respondents. Supplementary counter affidavit filed taken on record.
(2.) PETITIONER obtained electricity connection to run its industry in the year 1997. The industry was functional only for three months and on 31.10.1997 it was closed and electricity disconnected. However, petitioner was held liable to pay Minimum Consumption Guarantee for six months. Along with counter affidavit, a letter dated 2.5.2000 has been filed, which shows that the total outstanding dues against the petitioner as assessed by the Executive Engineer was Rs. 51,25,572/ -and late payment to the tune of Rs. 44,66,447/ -. The total outstanding dues from the own admission of respondents as revealed by letter dated 2.5.2000 comes to Rs. 95,86,016. In response to notice petitioner pays Rs. 23,00000/ - and Rs. 20,00000/ - deposited as security has been forfeited. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that total outstanding dues comes only to Rs. 51,00000/ - and odd. It has been further submitted that the regulatory commission had issued a circular dated 5.2.2010 to settle the disputes under One Time Settlement Scheme. In response to circular the petitioner had moved an application dated 23.3.2010 to avail the benefit of One Time Settlement Scheme. In response to application moved by the petitioner the respondents had sent a letter dated 31.3.2010 (Annexure -5) in which additional amount of Rs. 1, 92,82, 000/ - has been added.
(3.) THE submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the additional amount could not have been added which seems to be incorrect and false in view of letter dated 2.5.2000, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure CA 11 to the counter affidavit filed by the respondents.;