Mahesh Basoya v. North Delhi Power Ltd

1. By this writ petition, the petitioner assails a bill dated 31®' August, 2009. It is submitted by Mr. K. Datta, learned counsel for the respondent that this bill has no co-relation with the subject matter of the earlier settlement which was arrived at with the petitioner on allegations of dishonest abstraction of energy. The impugned bill has been raised against the petitioner on allegations of misuse which are premised on an inspection dated ir^ July, 2008 and a final orWer dated 25''^ September, 2008. Copies of these documents have been handed over in court. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these documents were not served upon the petitioner and he was not aware of the same.. ^.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent has handed over a copy of the inspection report dated ll^'July, 2008, show cause notice dated 11''" July, 2008 2009:DHC:8375 V - - 3 and the final order of assessment dated 25'^ September, 2008 based whereon the impugned bill dated 3r' August, 2009 has been raised. The inspection dated July, 2008 and the show cause notice of the same date or the final order dated 25^^ September, 2009 have not been assailed in the present writ petition. In view of the above, this writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate legal remedy if aggrieved by the action of the respondents in accordance with law, including on all grounds placed in the V -present writ petition. It is made clear that nothing herein contained is an expression of opinion on the merits of the contention raised by the petitioner. 7^ GITA MITTALJ OCTOBER 22, 2009. ^