Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Madhya Gujarat Vij Company Limited, a distribution licensee, filed a petition under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 226, and 227 of the Constitution of India read with the Electricity Act, 2003, challenging an order dated 7.9.2022 passed by the Chief Electrical Inspector (Appellate Authority) in Appeal No.2153 of 2022. The respondent No.1, Panoli Intermediates (India) Pvt. Ltd., had an HT electricity connection with a contracted load of 1500 KVA. On 26.04.2018, representatives of the petitioner inspected the installation and found that respondent No.1 was utilizing electricity supply in adjacent Plot Nos.156A and 156B, which were owned by respondent No.1, without any prior intimation or permission. Consequently, a provisional assessment under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 was issued on 03.05.2018. After granting an opportunity of hearing to respondent No.1, a final supplementary bill was raised. Respondent No.1 filed an appeal under Section 127 before the Chief Electrical Inspector, who quashed the supplementary bill. The petitioner challenged this order. The High Court analyzed the provisions of Sections 126 and 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and held that the extension of electricity supply to adjacent plots without prior permission constitutes unauthorized use. The appellate authority's order was found to be perverse and without proper reasoning, as it failed to consider the evidence on record. The court set aside the appellate authority's order and restored the supplementary bill. The petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Electricity Law - Unauthorized Use of Electricity - Section 126 Electricity Act, 2003 - Extension of supply to adjacent plots without permission - The petitioner, a distribution company, inspected the respondent's premises and found that electricity was being utilized in adjacent plots without prior intimation. A provisional assessment under Section 126 was issued, and after hearing, a final supplementary bill was raised. The appellate authority quashed the bill. The High Court held that the extension of supply to adjacent plots without permission constitutes unauthorized use, and the appellate authority's order was set aside. (Paras 3-10) B) Electricity Law - Appellate Authority's Jurisdiction - Section 127 Electricity Act, 2003 - Scope of appeal - The appellate authority under Section 127 has limited jurisdiction and cannot re-appreciate evidence or substitute its own findings without proper reasoning. The High Court found that the appellate authority's order was perverse and not based on evidence. (Paras 8-12) C) Electricity Law - Natural Justice - Opportunity of hearing - The petitioner granted an opportunity of hearing to the respondent before finalizing the assessment. The appellate authority's order was set aside as it failed to consider the evidence on record. (Paras 5-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the extension of electricity supply to adjacent plots without prior intimation or permission constitutes unauthorized use under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and whether the appellate authority erred in quashing the supplementary bill.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, set aside the order dated 7.9.2022 passed by the Chief Electrical Inspector (Appellate Authority) in Appeal No.2153 of 2022, and restored the supplementary bill issued by the petitioner.
Law Points
- Unauthorized use of electricity
- Section 126 Electricity Act 2003
- Supplementary bill
- Appellate authority's jurisdiction
- Natural justice
