- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. The appellant is aggrieved against the judgment dated 18.7.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 1387 of 2008 by which the writ petition of the respondent was allowed and the order of the Electricity Board dated 15.2.2008 has been quashed.
(2.) Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the respondent is a consumer of the Electricity Board, Jharkhand and on his premises inspection was conducted on 3.6.2005 and finding a case of theft, F.I.R was lodged on 4.6.2005. The Superintending Engineer gave a show cause notice to the respondent- writ petitioner by exercising power under clause 16.9 of the Electricity Tariff, 1993 and reduced the demand of Rs. 1,93,00,000/- to amount Rs. 1,10,000/-.
(3.) After about two years, the Board found that the Superintending Engineer had no jurisdiction to pass the order in view of Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and, therefore, recalled the order of the Superintending Engineer by impugned order dated 15.2.2008, which is the impugned order in the writ petition.;