- (1.) AGGRIEVED against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 23-12-2008 the petitioners have filed the present letters patent appeal. By the aforesaid common judgment the learned single Judge has dismissed writ petition No. 687 of 2003 and allowed writ petition No. 1265 of 2006. The petitioner is an industrial consumer of electricity supplied by respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to CESC Limited ). Petitioners received a notice dated 20th of September, 2001 from CESC Limited alleging tampering with the seals of the meter and demanding a sum of Rs. 14,20,102. 40 paise on account of unmetered illegal consumption of power. The petitioners challenged the aforesaid notice in W. P. No. 1903 of 2001. By an order dated 25th of September, 2001, the Court appointed an advocate and an electrical inspector to be appointed by the chief Electrical Inspector, as Special Officers to visit the factory premises and file separate reports as to whether the meter bears any sign of tampering with any seal. In the same order the petitioners were directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3. 80 lakhs without prejudice to his rights and contentions. The petitioners were also directed to deposit Rs. 26,030/- as costs and charges for replacement of a new meter and reconnection charges. It appears that the Special Officer was changed by order dated 27th September, 2001. Thereafter, the Special Officers visited the premises of the petitioners in terms of the order dated 25th of September, 2001. Two reports were submitted to this court. On perusal of the same by a further order dated 28th of September, 2001 the court directed one PRS Parmacel, the supplier of the seals to CESC Limited to depute experts for examination and/or testing of the seals at the factory premises. In the meantime, upon payment of a sum of Rs. 4,06,030/-, the electricity supply of the factory was restored on 30th September, 2001. After restoration of the supply the factory premises consumed electricity through meter No. 1994493. This matter was replaced on 29-4-2002 by a new matter being no. 1994618.
(2.) THE writ petition was disposed of by order dated 10th of December, 2001; the dispute was referred to the Chief Electrical inspector to go into the question, upon inspection of the disputed meter, as to whether the seals were tampered with by the writ petitioners for the purpose of committing theft of electrical energy. This was necessitated as an objection was raised with regard to the impartiality of M/s. PRS Parmacel as it was the sole supplier of seals to CESC limited. CESC Limited challenged the aforesaid order of the learned single Judge in appeal. This appeal was disposed of by a consent order dated 12-4-2002 which reads as under :- "cesc Limited will install a meter duly tested and certified by the office of the Chief electrical Inspector within 5 days, expenses of testing will be borne by the writ petitioner, after removing the existing meter and in course of such removal, if any Holographic/ roto Seal (s) is/are damaged then CESC Limited will not rely on such damaged Holographic/roto Seal (s ). For the purpose of supervising the process of removal of the existing meter at the consumer's premises and installation of the tested meter Mr. Subhasis Chakraborty an advocate of this Court is appointed Special officer who will remain present at the site in question at the time of removal of the existing meter and installation of the tested meter upon notice to and in presence of Chief electrical Inspector or his authorized representative. The Special Officer shall make a record of the Holographic/roto seal (s)which will be disturbed at the time of removal of the existing meter. The Special Officer shall also make a record of the other holographic/roto seal (s) which will remain undisturbed. The Chief Electrical Inspector or his authorized representative shall also record defects found, if any, on the metering circuit during the process of removal of the existing meter and installation of the tested meter. The Special Officer shall forward the copy of the minutes of the meeting to the Adjudicating Officer of CESC Limited as also to the Chief Electrical Inspector. The existing meter, after removal, shall be kept in a sealed box duly countersigned by the representatives of CESC Limited, writ petitioner and the Special Officer and the same shall be sent by the Special Officer for testing of the undisturbed Holographic seal (s) and Roto seal (s) to the Dean of Faculty of Engineering and Technology, jadavpur University who shall forward the report of such testing to the Adjudicating officer of CESC Ltd. Cost and expenses of such testing shall be borne by the petitioner. The Dean of Faculty of Engineering and technology, Jadavpur University shall then forward the meter in a sealed cover to the chief Electrical Inspector under intimation to CESC; Limited, the writ petitioner and the special Officer. The Chief Electrical Inspector shall, after testing the meter and after hearing the parties and looking into relevant records that may be placed by the parties including the minutes of the Special Officer, adjudicate as to the actual consumption for the period from October 25, 2001 till the meter is replaced. The Chief Electrical Inspector shall decide the matter within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the meter from Jadavpur University after affording opportunities of hearing to the parties. After installation of the tested meter CESC limited shall raise monthly energy bills on the basis of that meter, and the writ petitioner shall go on paying such bills. Till installation of the tested meter as above, bill shall be raised on the basis of recording of such meter at the Sub-Station of CESC Limited and the petitioner shall pay the same without prejudice and subject to award of the Chief Electrical Inspector or his authorized representative. After the dispute is resolved by the Chief electrical Inspector and the liability of the writ petitioner for the period from October 25, 2001 till date of replacement of the Meter as mentioned above is crystalised, appropriate credit shall be given to the writ petitioner for the payments already made by him during the said period. After giving such credit, if any amount is payable by the writ petitioner, the writ petitioner shall pay the same with Delayed Payment Surcharge. Similarly, if any amount is found to be refundable to the writ petitioner for the said period the same shall be adjusted from the future bill of the writ petitioner along with the same rate of interest as that of Delayed payment Surcharge chargeable by CESC limited. The authorities of CESC Limited will make necessary arrangement to take the Special officer at the site in question. The Special officer will be entitled to a remuneration of 300 gms. to be paid equally by CESC Limited and the Writ Petitioner. The Adjudicating Officer of CESC Limited shall dispose of the matter relating to the period from August 16, 2001 till September 24, 2001 after receiving the report of the jadavpur University and the Special Officer within a period of 4 weeks upon affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the Writ petitioner. "
(3.) IN view of the directions issued by the division Bench, the Adjudicating Officer assessed the amount due and payable by the petitioners. The assessment made by the adjudicating Officer was challenged by the petitioners before the appellate authority of cesc Limited. The appeal was dismissed by order dated 25th of February, 2003. This order was challenged by the appellants in w. P. No. 687 of 2003. Similarly, pursuant to the order of the Division Bench the Deputy chief Electrical Inspector, West Bengal, adjudicated the actual consumption of electricity by the appellants for the period from 25th of October, 2001 till 29th of April, 2002. A detailed order was passed on 27th of September, 2002. Ultimately, the following directions were issued :- "however, considering the above facts, counter arguments and submissions, it reveals that meter reading seems to be incorrect but all the other seals at the V T Jumper are in order and the meter after thoroughly testing was detected as set right condition as per report of testing Department. Therefore it is ordered :-That the Bills for the disputed period shall be revised as per average of actual meter reading consumption for the period of August 1, Sept. 1, Oct. 1 before the installation of the actual meter (which after testing found O. K.) i. e. average of three months to be taken into consideration;";