B.S.CHAUHAN,J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing the demand notice dated 22.03.2006 for recovery of Rs.2,54,686/- as outstanding dues towards electricity consumption.
(2.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that on 115.02.2006, in a surprise check by respondent Department, the petitioner was found committing theft of electricity. He was proceeded with under the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter called the 'Act '). However the offence was compounded under sub-section (3) of Section 152 of the Act, asking the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/-. Petitioner deposited the said amount but he received the impugned recovery notice dated 22.03.2006 for a sum of Rs.2,54,686/-. Hence the present petition. Sri Mayank Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that once the matter has been compounded and the petitioner has deposited the entire amount, no recovery is permissible. Therefore, the notice impugned is liable to be quashed.
(3.) ON the other hand, Ms. Suman Sirohi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents no.3 and 4 and Shri W.H. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation have submitted that the compounding fee was recovered as a penalty for committing the theft and the deposit of the said amount does not exonerate the petitioner from civil liability, i.e. from making payment of the outstanding dues of electricity consumed by him. The petition is liable to be dismissed. More so, if the petitioner has any grievance regarding the quantum of the amount, the only remedy available to him is to approach the Authority under the provisions of the U.P. Electricity Supply Code, 2005 but the writ petition is not maintainable.;