R.A. Sharma, J. - (1.) PETITIONER is a company carrying on business of manufacturing domestic and industrial thread and fur that purpose has established its factory at village Pipalsaya, district Nainital. On 27 -10 -1984 the Petitioner was sanctioned 2000KVA power load by the U.P. State Electricity Board (here -in -after referred to as the Board) and an agreement in that connection was executed between the Petitioner and the Board on 25 -7 -1985. An electricity meter was installed at the Petitioner's factory on 7 - -2 -1986. By a fresh agreement dated 28 -4 -1987 the power load of the Petitioner's factory was reduced from 2000 KVA to 1050 KVA. The Petitioner had been paying the electricity dues, according to the bills issued by the Board on the basis of the meter reading. On the basis of the inspection report dated 3 -9 -198/a notice dated 7 -9 -1987 was issued by the Executive Engineer of the Board to the Petitioner casting doubt about the accuracy of the meter installed at the Petitioners' factory and proposing to install a check meter. It was also mentioned in that letter that the electricity bills are being prepared provisionally on the basis of the meter reading which are liable to be revised and finalised subsequently. The Petitioner opposed the aforesaid proposal and asserted the correctness of the meter. On 30 -11 -1987 the check meter was installed at the Petitioners' unit by the Board. The Petitioner by letter dated 25 -3 -1988 requested for testing of the check meter and claims to have deposited the testing fee also. No action having been taken on the aforesaid request the Petitioner sent reminders. But the check meter was not tested. However, by a letter dated 26 -4 -1988 the Executive Engineer informed the Petitioner that the check meter's results show that the original meter installed at the Petitioners' unit was defective, as a consequence of which payment for the period from May, 1987 to 30 -11 -1987 shall be made on the basis of the check metets' reading in accordance with Regulation 21 (ii) of the Electricity Supply (Consumers) Regulations, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulation). For the period prior to May, 1987 from the date of connection, the Petitioner was informed that the assessment shall be made in accordance with Regulation 21 (iii) and for that purpose the Petitioner was called upon to give the necessary information. By notice dated 17 -5 -1988 and additional bill for Rs. 10,70,886,82 for the period from May 1987 to November, 1987, was issued to the Petitioner requiring him to make the payment of the said amount by 6 -6 -1988, failing which the electric supply was threatened to be disconnected. It is against these two notices dated April 26, 1988 and May 17, 1988 that writ petition no 10379 of 1988 has been filed by the Petitioner, praying for their quashing and for a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents not to take any action on the basis of these notices:
(2.) IN the aforesaid writ petition this Court on 15 -6 -1988 passed an interim order directing the Petitioner to take steps for decision by the Electrical Inspector under Section 26(6) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Petitioner accordingly made an application dated 9 -7 -1988 for getting the dispute decided by the Electrical Inspector. By letter dated 26 -8 -1988 the Petitioner was informed by the Chief Electrical Inspector that the testing bench was out of order and is under repairs and testing of the meter would be carried out only after it is repaired . During the pendency of the above writ petition the Board issued additional demand for payment of the electricity dues for the months of June and July 1988, based on the check meter readings The Petitioner filed writ petition No. 16723 of 1988, challenging the said demand. The Petitioner was granted an interim order retraining the disconnection of the electric supply subject to the payment of electricity dues by the Petitioner on the basis of original meter reading and furnishing security and bank guarantee for Rupees One Lakh every month, Petitioners case is that he has made the payment throughout the period of dispute regularly on the basis of the reading of the original meter and has been furnishing the bank guarantee and security as directed by this Court. Another demand notice dated 14 -6 -1990 for additional sum of Rs. 5,54,963.64 as electricity dues for the period upto July, 1988, on the basis of check meter reading, was issued to the Petitioner by the Board. Against this demand notice the Petitioner has filed writ petition No. 16325 of 1990.
(3.) IN the meantime the Chief Electrical Inspector checked the meter installed at Petitioners' unit on 28 -11 -1989 and found it defective. He accordingly submitted his report dated 11 -12 -1989. The Chief Electrical Inspector has also made estimate dated 10 -10 -1990 under Section 26(6). The Electrical Inspector has fixed rates of electricity dues for the period of six months only.;