Case Note & Summary
The Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (MSEDCL) challenged an award passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Aurangabad, in Pre-litigation Application Dispute No.44/2018. The respondent, Badrinath Pema Rathod, was a consumer of electricity. On 06/12/2016, the Flying Squad of MSEDCL checked his meter and found it tampered. A new meter was installed, and an assessment bill of Rs.9,490/- was served. An offence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (theft of electricity) was registered against him. Aggrieved, the respondent filed an application under Section 22(C) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 before the Permanent Lok Adalat, seeking cancellation of the assessment bill and direction to issue regular bills. The Permanent Lok Adalat passed an award directing MSEDCL to issue regular bills to the respondent and not to disconnect supply upon payment. MSEDCL challenged this award by way of a writ petition. The High Court held that the Permanent Lok Adalat had no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute because the allegation of theft of electricity under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 constitutes a criminal offence. Under Section 22(C) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, the Permanent Lok Adalat can only deal with civil disputes that do not involve criminal offences. Therefore, the award was without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside. The court also noted that the assessment bill was raised in accordance with law and the respondent's remedy lies in contesting the criminal proceedings. The writ petition was allowed, and the impugned award was quashed.
Headnote
A) Jurisdiction of Permanent Lok Adalat - Pre-litigation Conciliation - Section 22(C) of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 - Dispute involving criminal offence - The Permanent Lok Adalat cannot adjudicate disputes where a criminal offence is alleged, as its jurisdiction is limited to civil disputes not involving criminal offences. The allegation of theft of electricity under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, is a criminal offence, and thus the Permanent Lok Adalat lacked jurisdiction to pass the award. (Paras 5-8) B) Electricity Law - Theft of Electricity - Section 135 of Electricity Act, 2003 - Assessment Bill - When a consumer is found to have tampered with the meter and an offence under Section 135 is registered, the licensee is entitled to raise an assessment bill and is not obliged to issue regular bills pending resolution of the criminal proceedings. The Permanent Lok Adalat's direction to issue regular bills was contrary to law. (Paras 3-4, 8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Permanent Lok Adalat has jurisdiction to entertain a dispute involving an allegation of theft of electricity under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and whether the award directing MSEDCL to issue regular bills is legally sustainable.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned award of the Permanent Lok Adalat, and held that the Permanent Lok Adalat had no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute as it involved a criminal offence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
Law Points
- Jurisdiction of Permanent Lok Adalat
- Electricity theft under Section 135 of Electricity Act
- 2003
- Pre-litigation conciliation
- Legal Services Authorities Act
- 1987
