- (1.) The petitioner-Company seeks for quashing the order dated 15.10.2010, causing disconnection to the premises of the petitioner- Company and demanding Rs. 4,33,24,039/- as the amount payable on account of alleged theft of electricity. The petition also contains a prayer for quashing the reply filed in the contempt petition vide Annexure P-9. Consequent to the main relief, the petitioner seeks for restoration of electricity.
(2.) The order impugned in the writ petition on 15.10.2010 is said to be a provisional order of assessment on a finding of theft of electricity and after the filing of the writ petition, the learned counsel for the respondents states that a final order of assessment has been made and served on the petitioner on 26.7.2011. According to him, the writ petition itself is not maintainable and the final assessment order could be challenged by means of an appeal. I specifically put it to the counsel if he would amend the prayer to challenge the final assessment order itself but the counsel for the petitioner stated that the decision taken as regards the order of a provisional assessment is merely reiterated with no better consideration and without reference to the objections filed already against the provisional assessment and since it was an event subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, there was no necessity for having to amend the prayer in the writ petition.
(3.) Since the counsel for the respondents took the issue of an alternative remedy as available by means of an appeal, I had directed the counsel for the petitioner also to argue the point whether the writ petition could be maintained without exhausting statutory remedy of appeal.;