- (1.) A sum of Rs.39,941.78 was demanded and charged by the respondent-Corporation from the petitioner under an electricity connection memo dated 29.10.2003 for misusing the electricity connection, validity of that is questioned in this petition for writ.
(2.) The petitioner-firm, as averred in the writ petition, being in need of 260 HP electricity connection submitted an application in prescribed proforma alongwith all requisites to the competent authority of respondent-Corporation but no action was taken, therefore, in view of Clause 6.6 of the applicable guidelines by treating the sanction deemed to be granted for increasing electricity load the petitioner utilized extended load of the electricity. According to the counsel for the petitioner at the time of utilizing extended load of electricity no demand against the petitioner was due and the respondents unauthorizedly demanded and charged the fine of Rs. 39,941.78 under the head of misuse.
(3.) A reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of the respondent-Corporation stating therein that no sanction for extension of electricity load could be deemed to be granted if any amount is due against a consumer towards the Corporation. A demand was outstanding against the petitioner, therefore, the provisions of Clause 6.6 of the guidelines is having no application in present controversy. The petitioner was aware of it but just for illegal use of electricity the load was extended.;