- (1.) The dispute in this writ petition is over plea of the petitioners for reduction of contract demand or load in relation to supply of electricity to their manufacturing unit at Baruipur. The petitioners contend that their request for such reduction was not complied with. The petitioner No. 1 is engaged in the business of manufacture of railway wagon components and other engineering items. The first petitioner had entered into an agreement with the West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (the distribution company) on 16 January, 2010 for supply of high voltage supply of electricity, specifying their contract demand to be 5500 KVA for the first year and 6500 KVA for the next four years in respect of their production unit of Baruipur, 24 Parganas (South). Clause 17 of this agreement, a copy of which has been Annexure 'P1' to the writ petition, stipulates: "17 (1) In the event of the Consumer(s) desiring to increase his/its/their contract demand during the continuance of the Agreement, the WBSEDCL may require the Consumer(s) to intimate in the writing stating the quantity of the power required for the next 5 year period of operation whereupon the WBSEDCL shall take steps as per WBERC's Regulation applicable thereof subject to compliance of necessary formalities including those specified herein below by the consumer. (2) The Consumer(s) shall pay to the WBSEDCL any expense incurred by reason of alteration and/or extension in respect of any Service Line, Switchgear, Meters and other equipment necessitated to meet such altered Contract demand. (3) The security deposit may be increased to take into account the altered Contract demand. (4) The request for downward revision of contract demand will be considered as per WBERC's Regulation applicable thereof."
(2.) It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners in this case that their workmen had resorted to an illegal strike with effect from 4 March, 2013 which ultimately led to declaration of suspension of work with effect from 11 March, 2013. Because of this situation, which the petitioners refer to as "Force Majeure" situation, the petitioners allege to have written a letter seeking reduction of contract demand 100 KVA. A copy of this letter dated 12 March, 2013 has been annexure 'P4' to the writ petition. This letter stipulates: 'To The Regional Manager 24 Parganas (South), Baruipur, Kolkata - 700 144 Consumer No. C- 11004 Sub: Reduction of contract demand to 100 KVA Sir, We would like to inform you that due to gross Industrial unrest, the Management has been forced to declare "Suspension of Work" w.e.f. 10.03.2013 until further Notice. We enclose a copy of Notice dated 10.03.2013 in this respect which is self explanatory. You are under the circumstances requested to reduce our Contract Demand to 100 KVA for lighting load only till further notice. Thanking you Yours faithfully, For BESCO LIMITED (Foundry Division) MIHIR MUKHERJEE General Manager (Legal & Admn.) Enclo : as above"
(3.) Complaint of the petitioners in this proceeding is that this request was not acceded to and the distribution company went on raising bills on the basis of their original contract and demands for payment of charges were raised on the petitioners as per the original contract. In the writ petition, the petitioners have applied for quashing of two bills raised on them by the respondent company dated 7th May, 2013 and 31st May, 2013, copies of which have been made Annexures "P-9" and "P-16" to the writ petition. The bill dated 7th May, 2013 requires payment of Rs. 29,09,457/- which includes demand charge of Rs. 17,47,046/-, whereas payment required to be made as per the bill dated 4th May, 2013 is Rs. 27,77,312/-, that includes demand charge for Rs. 17,31,545/-. The petitioners also seek a declaration to the effect that clause 4.3.6 of the Est Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms of Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2011 is ultra vires the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of Section 61(d) of the Electricity Act, 2003. As per the said clause, (i.e. 4.3.6), a distribution company under the 2003 Act has the benefit of resorting to "Force Majeure" events for failing to supply electricity under certain conditions, while a consumer is not granted such benefit so far as his part of obligation is concerned, even in "Force Majeure" situations.;