D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) PETITIONER , has challenged the order, passed vide letter No. 1007 dated 12.07.2008, by the Respondent No. 6, whereby an amount of Rs. 6,61,422/ - as "penalty" has been imposed against the petitioner and has prayed for quashing the aforesaid order and to issue appropriate direction to the Respondent No. 6 to take up and decide the matter strictly in accordance with the provisions of Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, after giving appropriate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also for a direction to the Respondents to restore the electric connection to the petitioner's premises without imposing any condition for payment of any amount, which may be subject to the outcome of the final assessment to be conducted by the Respondents themselves.
(2.) THE petitioner is a Low Tension consumer of electricity supplied by the Respondent -J.S.E.B. On an inspection conducted by the Respondents on 07.05.2008, the officials of the Respondents -J.S.E.B. found certain evidences on the basis of which an inference was drawn that by tampering the seal of the electric meter box and the C.T. Box, the petitioner was committing theft of electric energy. On such prima facie findings, an F.I.R. was instituted under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 against the petitioner by the concerned authorities of the J.S.E.B. and an amount of Rs. 8,83,000/ - was assessed as the loss caused to the J.S.E.B. by theft of electricity. The electric supply to the petitioner's premises was promptly slopped. Liter, a provisional assessment was made and a provisional bill was raised and served upon the petitioner under the signature of the Assistant Electric Engineer. Upon such disconnection, the petitioner had earlier preferred a writ application vide W.P.(C) No. 2699 of 2008. The petitioner had challenged the amount of loss as assessed and stated in the F.I.R. and had also contended that the provisionally assessed bill was never served in accordance with the provisions of Section 126 of the Electricity Act on the petitioner. The petitioner had also challenged the act of the Respondent -Electricity Board in disconnecting the electric supply on the ground that it was totally arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the statute.
(3.) BY order dated 16.06.2008, passed in the aforesaid writ application, this Court had directed the Respondent to serve the provisionally assessed bill to the petitioner immediately so as to enable the petitioner to file his objections and after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, to pass a final order of assessment within two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order. It was further directed that after the final assessment, the Board shall restore the petitioner's electric connection forthwith on payment of the assessed amount.;