AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Date : 07-08-2026
The petitioner has filed the instant Writ petition for the following relief:
“For commanding and directing the Respondents and quash the Energy Bill dated 01.11.2022 issued by the North Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd. In the name of petitioner LEGACY No. H 6933 whereby and where under an energy bill of Rs. 9,74,562/- (Rupees Nine Lacs Seventy Four Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Two only) has been issued against the petitioner for the energy supply against the LEGACY No. H6933 CA No. 400003321 which has already been disconnected by authority themselves the Respondents far back on 07.11.1992 itself. Then Electric Company sent Bill on 09.03.2013 where under an energy bill of Rs. 6,05,258/- thereafter petitioner filed C.W.J.C. No. 10776 of 2013 before Hon'ble High Court. Hon'ble High Court was pleased to passed order dated 07.09.2015 petitioner thereafter filed representation but electricity company was not consider the case and sent Bill dated 25.03.2022 there after 01.11.2022 with effect from the date of installation of the Electric Meter i.e. 20.04.1990 to the date of disconnection of electric line i.e. on 07.11.1992.”
The brief facts, as culled out from the Writ petition, are that the petitioner had applied for a domestic electric connection of 1 K.W. for his residential house situated at Maqsoodpur, Hajipur, in the year 1990. After completing the due formalities and depositing an installation charge of Rs.150/-, an electric meter was installed at the house of the petitioner on 20.04.1990.
It is the specific contention of the Learned counsel for the petitioner that although the electric meter was installed at the house of the petitioner on 20.04.1990, the electric supply was started only in the month of April, 1991, i.e., after one year of installation. Due to a sudden requirement, the petitioner sold his house and land situated at Maqsoodpur for which he made an application to the Electric Board for disconnection of the electric meter on 07.11.1992. At the time of disconnection, the petitioner requested the Electricity Board to supply the electric energy bill. Surprisingly, an electric consumption bill of Rs.38,491.21 dated 28.09.2000 was sent to the petitioner in the month of September, 2000. The petitioner issued a legal notice dated 04.07.2001 for redressal of his grievance. However, no response was received from the respondent. The petitioner, therefore, awaited correction of the energy bill. On 09.03.2013, subsequent energy bill for Rs.6,05,258/- was issued in respect of the disconnected meter. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 26.04.2013 before the Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Hajipur but no action was taken thereon. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court by filing CWJC No.10776 of 2013 and this Court, after hearing the parties, disposed of the case vide order dated 07.09.2015, directing the petitioner to file a representation before the Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Hajipur, who in turn was directed to inspect the premises of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. Accordingly, the petitioner made a representation before the Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Hajipur and after one month, the petitioner again filed a representation before the Assistant Engineer, North Bihar Power Distribution Company, Hajipur. However, the respondents, without considering the representation, issued electric bills dated 25.03.2022 and 01.11.2022, for which the petitioner was constrained to file present Writ petition.
A detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 6. The contents of the counter affidavit disclose that the petitioner, Gauri Shankar Sah, son of Late Rajendra Sah, applied for a DS-II connection on 20.04.1990 and the connection was provided vide Work Order No.12/1990-91, and the meter was fixed on 26.06.1990. The counter affidavit further discloses that the petitioner was always provided with the bills and that the petitioner never filed any representation stating that he had not received any bill. However, a bill of Rs.26,054.62/- was issued to the petitioner in the month of September, 2000. Though it is contended that the petitioner had filed a representation and no action was taken thereon, the said representation could not be traced out due to the lapse of a long period of time. The counter affidavit further discloses that, pursuant to the order of this Court in CWJC No.10198 of 2013, the authorities passed an appropriate order revising the bill amount to Rs.81,653.27/- and, prayed to dismiss the Writ petition as it is devoid of merits.
Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the records.
Considering the rival contentions of both the parties and upon perusal of the record, it is evident that this is the second round of litigation and the petitioner is challenging the inaction of the respondents in not passing any order in compliance with the order of this Court in CWJC No.10198 of 2013.
The counter affidavit clearly discloses that, in compliance with the order of this Court, the petitioner’s bill was revised to Rs.81,653.27/-. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved by the revised bill, the appropriate remedy available to the petitioner is to approach the CGRF in case of a dispute under Section 42(6) of the Electricity Act.
As an alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, this Court directs the petitioner to approach the CGRF for redressal of his grievance.
With the aforesaid observation, the Writ petition stands disposed of.
Interlocutory application, if any, shall also stands disposed of.