- (1.) The present Letters Patent Appeal against the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 27.04.2009, was initially dismissed on 09.09.2011 along with many other appeals raising similar questions of law on identical facts. However, on an application filed by the appellant, the said order was recalled qua the appellant in view of the assertion and the argument raised that the appellant had taken steps for shifting of load from 11 kV to 66 kV vide letter dated 24.04.2004 (Annexure P-5), therefore, the appellant cannot be made liable to pay surcharge for not shifting of 66 kV supply.
(2.) The arguments now raised by the Learned Counsel for the appellant need to be examined in the light of the Regulations and the circulars framed by the Punjab State Electricity Board (for short 'the Board') respondent herein from time to time.
(3.) The Board has initially issued a Circular on 23.06.1995 that all Induction Furnaces, prospective as well as existing furnaces, with a contract load of 1500 kVA and above shall be supplied electricity under the category of 66 kV. An option was given to the Induction Furnaces to convert to 66 kV within 18 months after which they will be liable to pay surcharge at the rate of 17.5% on the tariff already being charged. The said circular was objected to by the Association of Induction Furnace Industries. Another Commercial Circular No.25/99 was issued by the Board on 08.06.1999. Vide such circular, the levy of surcharge to the existing consumers was not insisted upon, but it was decided that all future connections above 1500 kVA/2500 KW shall be at 66 kV only. It also contemplated that all other instructions to Induction Furnaces will remain unchanged.;