- (1.) HEARD the parties.
(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, there are no arrears against it as in terms of the orders passed on 23.10.2000 in CWJC No. 3658 of 2000(R) and the order dated 3.5.2001 passed in CWJC No. 1827 of 2001 the petitioner deposited the amounts with the Board and the rest of the amount has been kept in abeyance/stayed by this Court which is clear from letter No. 1033 dated 17.5.2005 issued by the Electrical Engineer, Dhanbad (Annexure -1). In such circumstance, the respondents be directed to grant the Load Factor Rebate in terms of provisions of 2004 Tariff of the Board, in respect of High Tension Consumers as the said amounts kept in abeyance/stayed is fully secured under the security amounts lying with the Board and the Bank Guarantees furnished by the petitioner and if ultimately it is found that petitioner is liable to pay the said amounts stayed by this Court, the Board can adjust/realize the same from the said security amounts and the Bank Guarantees. In the counter affidavit, the Board did not dispute the said Annexure -1. However, Mr. Rajesh Shankar, learned counsel appearing for the Board submitted that petitioner must keep the Bank Guarantees alive till the decision of the said cases as petitioner's connection has been finally disconnected.
(3.) MR . Mittal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the Load Factor Rebate comes to Rs. 26,42,504/ - from January, 2004 to 21st May, 2005 with regard to all the three connections as per the statement Annexure -9).;