M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) IN this writ application the petitioner has prayed for issuance a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 2.12.2003 passed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Ranchi in Consumer Case No. 21/2003 and further for quashing the letter dated 20.1.2004 issued by the Electrical Executive Engineer, Electricity Supply Circle, Dhanbad intimating the petitioner that the bill has been corrected and a sum of Rs. 7,03,955/ - is payable to the Board.
(2.) THE petitioner is running a hotel in the town of Dhanbad. In 1999 when the petitioner was served with bill of different amounts, it challenged the same by filing CWJC No. 2970/99R. The writ petition was disposed of on 30.1.2001 directing the respondent -Board to raise fresh bill. When fresh bill was raised, the petitioner again challenged the same by filing CWJC No. 2064/2001 which was disposed of on 11.5.2001 and the matter was remitted to the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum. Before the Forum the petitioner prayed for a direction upon the respondents to make Irspection of the premises of the petitioner to ascertain the connected load, and thereafter, raise bill on the basis of connected load and for other reliefs. Petitioner 'scase is that it has connected load of 8 KW in the hotel. The meter installed in the premises was out of order since 1996 and new meter was installed in 2000. But in 1998 electric bills were raised on the basis of contract load of 18 KW. This Court in C.W.J.C. No. 2064/2001 directed the Board to make local inspection of the premises of the consumer to ascertain to connect load. In compliance of the said direction the premises was inspected and the connected load of 15 K.W. was found. However, from the inspection report it was found that the petitioner refused to sign the inspection report on the ground that higher wattage of bulbs were included in the said inspection report. The petitioner thereafter disputed the subsequent bills raised by the Board on the basis of connected load of 18 K.W.
(3.) THE respondent -Board contested the claim of the petitioner before the Forum and stated in their counter -affidavit that the load of petitioner 'spremises was found 18 K.W. and accordingly the bills were raised on the basis of the said load. It is contended that in terms of order dated 30.1.2001 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2970/ 99(R) the bill of the petitioner had already been revised on the basis of consumption recorded by the new meter. The tribunal recorded the following findings : "The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that originally load of his electric connection was 8 K.W. but the bill date 28.12.1998 was served by the respondents on the basis of 18 K.W. In the support of the statement that connected load was 8 K.W., the petitioner has not submitted any document whatsoever. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the respondent -Board submitted in the counter -affidavit as well as in course of his argument that connected load in the petitioner 'spremises on the basis of inspection conducted prior to the year 1996 was found to be 18 K.W. and accordingly the bills were regularly raised. As the petitioner failed to prove his points that his connected load was ever 8 K.W., we are left with no option but to accept the contention of the respondent -Board that the connected load in the premises of the petitioner was 18 K.W. and the Board was within authority to raise bills on the basis of 18 K.W. till 8.3.2003 when a fresh inspection was carried out." ;