Rajendra Nath Mitttal, J. - (1.) This judgment of mine will dispose of a bunch of writ petitions, as detailed below, which involve common questions of law and facts. The petitioners can be mainly divided into two categories, namely:-- (i) Large Supply Consumers. (ii) Medium Supply Consumers. Civil Writs Nos. 6603 of 1974, 192, 229, 589, 591, 593, 594, 626, 645, 678, 679, 680, 682, 683, 722, 723, 725, 726, 727, 728, 729, 730, 731, 742, 747, 777, 778, 779, 780, 833, 843, 863, 868, 869, 881, 883, 884, 885, 886, 887, 907, 964, 965, 975, 979 and 980 of 1975: and 25, 595, 681, 733 and 838 of 1975 (Arc Furnaces' Category) belong to former category of petitioners: and 422, 584, 676, 720, 721, 724, 732, 743, 781, 841, 848, 867 and 892 of 1975 to latter category of petitioners. (Some of the large supply consumers are running Furnaces. Such consumers constitute subdivision amongst the large supply consumers. A specific mention has been made about these consumers in the aforesaid list).
(2.) The facts have been given here from civil writ petition No. 733 of 1975. The petitioner owns a factory and is manufacturing alloy steel and steel castings. It is a large supply consumer of electricity which is supplied by the Har-yana State Electricitv Board, respondent No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'). The connected load of the petitioner is 8687.649 K. Ws. and its contract demand is also the same. It has been allotted 1.06.590 units on daily basis as its power quota by the Board. There was shortage of electric energy in the State of Haryana and the State Government issued orders and directions for maintaining the supply and securing the equitable distribution of the energy. The petitioner was subiected to power cut on account of the orders and directions of the State Government. The Board in spite of power cut, has been billing the petitioner on the basis of demand charges as was done earlier. According to the petitioner, the Board is not entitled to charge the demand charges and it has challenged its rights to do so. The State of Haryana, the petitioner says, is entitled to charge duty on the energy consumed under the Punjab Electricitv (Duty) Act 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Duty Act'). It is, however, charging duty not only on the consumption of energy but also on the demand charges. On April 15, 1974, the electricity duty was revised whereby it was increased from 20% to 50% on the category pf industrial consumers in which the petitioner falls. The above notification was amended by notification, dated April 24, 1974, with retrospective effect from April 15, 1974, and certain changes were made in the slabs. The Board, according to the petitioner, instead of collecting the duty according to the above notifications from April 15, 1974, is doing so, from April 1, 1974. The Board has been chanting surcharge of 20% on the amount of bills. It is alleged by the petitioner that it is entitled to the duty only on the bill relating to energy consumed by it and not on demand charges. The Board revised the tariff with effect from August 1. 1974. By virtue of the new tariff, the energy charges and demand charges have been increased. The petitioner has also challenged the tariff regarding the demand charges and the surcharge and the electric duty on the demand charges. All the writ petitions have been contested by the Board. 2-A. The first question that arises for determination is as to whether the Board is entitled to demand charges in spite of the fact that it imposed cut in the supply of electric energy. In order to decide this question, it is necessary to know as to how the tariffs are framed, Section 49 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Supply Act') authorizes the Board to frame uniform tariffs. The aforesaid section is as follows:- "49 (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act and of regulation, if any, made in this behalf, the Board may supply electricity to any person not being a licensee upon such terms and conditions as the Board thinks fit and may for the purposes of such supply frame uniform tariffs. (2) In fixing the uniform tariffs, the Board shall have regard to all or any of the following factors, namely:-" (a) the nature of the supply and the purpose for which it is required: (b) the co-ordinated development of the supply and distribution of electricity within the State in the most efficient and economical manner, with Particular reference to such development in areas not for the time being served or adeauatelv served by the licensee: (c) the simplification and standardisation of methods and rates of charges for such supplies; (d) the extension and cheapening of supplies of electricity to sparsely develop-ed area. (3) Nothing in the foregoing provisions of this section shall derogate from the power of the Board, if it considers it necessary or expedient to fix different tariffs for the supply of electricity to any person not being a licensee, having regard to the geographical position of any area, the nature of the supply and purpose for which supply is required and any other relevant factors. (4) In fixing the tariff and terms and conditions for the supply of electricity, the Board shall not show undue preference to any person."
(3.) A reading of the section shows in fixing the tariffs, the Board shall take into consideration various factors, such as, the nature of the supply and the purposes for which the electricity is required, the simplification and standardisation of methods and rates of charges for such supplies and the coordinated development of the supply and distribution of electricity within the State in the most economical and efficient manner. The section also authorizes the Board to fix different tariffs for the supply of electricity to any person not being a licensee in different circumstances. In doing so, it has to take into consideration the nature of supply and the purposes for which the supply is required and any other relevant factors. The section clearly authorizes the Board to simplify and standardise the methods and rates of charges.;