- (1.) In all these writ applications common question of law and facts are involved and, therefore, the same have been heard and disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) Petitioners have challenged the validity of Notification No. 810, dated 29-7-1994 issued by the Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board under S. 79 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 and also the Clarificatory Letter No. 1074, dated 13-7-1996 issued by the Board. Petitioner M/s. Rishi Cement Co. Ltd. have also challenged the impugned order dated 5-1-1999 passed by the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Dhanbad Area Electricity Board, Dhanbad who refused to entertain the claim of the petitioner under Clause 13 of the H.T. agreement for the different financial years.
(3.) The facts of the cases lie in a narrow Compass. Petitioners are High Tension consumers. The respondent-Board under the agreement agreed to supply electricity in the premises of the petitioners for running their factories. Petititioners'case is that during the relevant financial years Board was not able to supply electrical energy continuously and constantly and there has been interruption for many hours as per the record maintained by the petitioners. However, the respondent-Board raised bills in which no proportionate reduction/deduction was made by the Board on account of inability to supply electrical energy constantly and continuously. Petitioners, therefore, filed their claim under Clause 13 of the agreement for the proportionate reduction in the minimum guarantee charges. The claims made by the petitioners have been rejected as not entertainable on the ground that the same has been filed after expiry of the period as prescribed in Board's Notification No. 810, dated 29-7-1994 and the Clarificatory Letter dated 13-7-1996 issued by the Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna.;