R.R. Prasad, J. - (1.) IT is the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner -company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 got electrical connection in HTSS category with the Respondent -Jharkhand State Electricity Board for a contract demand of Rs. 3000 KVA against which, according to the case of the Petitioner, monthly consumption used to be about 6 -8 lakhs unit on average basis. The meter which has been installed by the licensee is of such nature that it can easily indicate even slightest interference or tampering meant for the purpose of illegal extraction of electric energy. The meter which has been installed always remains in the lock and seal of the licensee. That meter is connected with the CTPT unit which has been mounted on a steel structure at considerable height. It happens so that on 25.8.2010, an inspection team inspected the meter and the metering arrangement installed in the metering room, every seal of the metering unit was found intact. Thereupon, when inspection of CTPT unit was made, one seal it was allegedly found tampered with and when top cover was removed, a spanner suitable to open the nuts and bolts connecting secondary wire or loop of metering unit was found which, according to the officer of the inspecting team, was sufficient to draw inference to have caused interference in the metering unit to record the correct consumption and as such, on the basis of the inspection report, first information report was lodged under Sections 135 and 138 of the Electricity Act for committing theft of the electricity causing loss to the Board to the tune of Rs. 2,83,23,733/ -. Thereupon, a proceeding was drawn under 126 of the Electricity Act whereby loss to the Board was provisionally assessed at Rs. 1,62,78,010/ -. On getting the said report, the Petitioner filed an objection on 16.9.2010. Upon it, decision is still to be taken. Meanwhile, the Petitioner has filed this writ application wherein prayer has been made to quash the provisional assessment order; to direct the Respondent to restore the power supply immediately; to quash the inspection report dated 25.8.2010 and also for a direction to the Respondent to call for the record of Nilachal Feeder of Manikui Grid so as to be ascertained about the consumption of the unit by the Petitioner in order to arrive at correct decision as to whether any theft of electric energy has been committed or not.
(2.) MR . Mittal, learned Senior counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that admittedly inspecting team did not find anything wrong with the metering unit situated in the Petitioner's premises and in fact, nothing was found wrong with the CTPT but unscrupulously it has been shown that one spanner has been found in the unit of CTPT. In this regard it was submitted that demonstratively it can be shown to this Court that No. spanner had been found in the unit of CTPT which gets reflected from the fact that CTPT unit does have many seals and out of it only one was found to be tampered with, which fact, even if it is admitted for the sake of argument, one can not believe that top cover may be removed when others seals are intact and this fact has even been supported by the person of the manufacturing company of the CTPT unit in its letter dated 22.9.2010 which was issued in response to information sought by the Petitioner. It has also been reported that even any spanner was found that would never affect the normal working/performance of the unit.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel further submitted that allegation of finding a spanner gets falsified from the fact that spanner which was taken out from the bottom of the CTPT unit filled with the oil never seems to be smeared with oil which fact gets reflected from photograph annexed with the writ petition whereas hand of the person who took it out seems to be drenched with oil.;