- (1.) In this writ application the petitioner has challenged the order dated 203-2002 passed by respondent No. 2, General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Dumka Area Electricity Board, Dumka, whereby the claim of the petitioner under Clause 13 of the H.T. Agreement has been disallowed and fresh bill has been raised.
(2.) The short question that falls for consideration is as to whether respondent No. 2 was justified in disallowing the claim for the period when the factory was closed due to labour unrest and further petitioner is entitled to remission for non-supply of energy due to interruption below 30 minutes.
(3.) Petitioner-factory is engaged in Re- rollers, Fabricators and Mechanical Engineers. It is High-tension consumer having contract demand of 225 KVA and agreement to this effect was entered into between the petitioner and the then Bihar State Electricity Board. It is contended that due to labour unrest and strike, the factory was closed from 19-10-2000 to 8-12-2000, as a result of which there was no consumption of electricity and there was also interruption in the constant supply of electricity. Petitioner, therefore, lodged a claim under Clause 13 of the H.T. Agreement on 24-8-2001 and deposited 50% of the A.M.G. Bill before filing the said claim. Respondent No. 2 who is a Competent Authority disposed of the claim by the impugned order and disallowed remission disbelieving the closure of the factory due to strike.;