- (1.) Heard Shri Vivek Raj Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Prabhat Narain holding brief of Shri Kapil Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents. With the consent of parties we decide the writ petition at admission stage.
(2.) In pursuance of the order dated 21.03.2012 passed by this Court, respondent No. 4, the Executive Engineer is present in person. Though, he submits that in pursuance of the judgment and order dated 27.09.2011 a decision has been taken but the same has not been served on the petitioner till today. The petitioner is the owner of the house of C-9H, Park Road, Mahanagar Extension, Lucknow. The tenant Santosh Singh failed to pay the electricity dues and due to non-payment of the electricity dues, the supply of the electricity was disconnected on 25.11.2008 and thereafter the meter was also removed by the officers of the opposite parties on 02.06.2009. An F.I.R. was also lodged against the petitioner in Mahanagar Police Station on 27.11.2009. The respondents had published O.T.S. Scheme with regard to electricity dues. The tenant Santosh Singh moved an application for O.T.S. for electricity dues and he also deposited the requisite fee of Rs. 1,000/- for consideration of the case. In compliance thereof, the opposite parties issued an electricity bill for the period from 16.07.2008 to 25.11.2008 for Rs. 7,33,014.00 including the assessed amount as theft of electricity of Rs. 5,70,933,00. Against the said electricity bill, tenant Santosh Singh filed an objection under Section 126(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003 on 15.04.2010 before the respondent No. 3. It appears that during the pendency of the objection filed under Section 126(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003, the respondents had proceeded ahead against the petitioner with regard to recovery of electricity dues. Tenant Santosh Singh preferred a Writ Petition bearing No. 4564 (M/B) of 2010 in this Court which was disposed of by this Court vide judgment and order dated 14.05.2010 directing the respondents to decide the controversy in accordance to law by passing a speaking and reasoned order expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months. In compliance thereof, the respondents issued another bill dated 31.05.2010 for a period from 30.04.3010 to 31.05.2010 for Rs. 2,86,540.68 paise. However, the said bill was opposed on the ground that the electricity was not used either by the petitioner or the tenant during the period in question. Even then, the petitioner tried to pay an amount of Rs. 2,86,566.00 through Cheque No. 849911 dated 07.12.2010 towards electricity dues but the same was not accepted. Hence, the petitioner filed another writ petition bearing No. 4174 (M/B) of 2011 in this Court which was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 04.05.2011. During the course of hearing of the said writ petition, Shri Prabhat Narayan, learned counsel for the Corporation stated that the petitioner may approach the Executive Engineer where she can deposit the amount in question through cheque subject to verification by the Executive Engineer that the payment of final amount is validly discharged. In view of the statement made by Shri Prabhat Narayan, the writ petition was finally disposed of on 04.05.2011. Thereafter, the respondents issued revised bill on 09.05.2011 for Rs. 2,20,801.00 for the period from 16.07.2008 to 09.05.2011. It has been further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the bill of Rs. 2,20,801.00 was deposited on the same day through Cheque No. 042228 dated 09.05.2011 vide receipt No. 079412 on 09.05.2011 which was received by the office of the respondents on the same day. It is also stated that although, in the aforesaid electricity bill again an amount of Rs. 1,44,070.66 was shown as previous balance without mentioning the period and Rs. 53.408,71 as late payment penalty. Thereafter accepting the said amount the respondents restored the electricity supply of the petitioner.
(3.) Subject to aforesaid back-drop the petitioner received a letter dated 15.07.2011 from the office of respondent No. 3 by which he was again required to deposit an amount of Rs. 5,78,555/- by 20th July, 2011.;