JUDGMENT : Satyeshwar Roy, J. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for quashing that part of letter (Annexure 4) of the Senior Engineer, Electrical respondent no. 1 dated 11th November 1977 to the petitioners by which the former informed the latter that an additional charge of 3 percent on the maximum demand and energy charge shall have to he paid by the petitioners. Prayer has also been made for restraining the respondents from levying additional charge. 2. Admittedly, the petitioners are H.T. (High Tension) consumers of the Electricity Board. 1t is also admitted that by providing a transformer the higher voltage has been stepped down for supplying to the petitioners electricity at 440 volt. The case of the petitioners is that in the tariff there is provision for an additional charge of 7.5 percent to be levied on the total billed amount including the maximum demand charge and energy charge but not on fuel surcharge and the meter rent in respect of the power supply at 6.6 K.V. or 3.3 K.V. Besides this no additional charge is payable. But the respondents intend to levy an additional charge of 3 percent. 3. In the counter affidavit, it has been stated by the respondents that whatever may be nature of supply that is, 3.3 KV, 6.6 KV or 11 K.V. if the connections is of 400 volt and meter is on the low voltage side, all such consumers shall have to pay an additional charge of 3 percent. 4. I have already noticed that the facts are not in dispute. The question, therefore, is whether in view of the fact that energy is supplied to the petitioners after stepping down by a transformer, under any of the provisions in the tariff, the Board may levy both 3 percent and 7.5 percent on maximum demand and energy charge for the purpose of billing. 5. The tariff provides general conditions and charges which are applicable to high tension service. Clause 1 of that provides- "(a) In case the metering of the maximum demand and energy consumption is made on the low voltage side of a distribution transformer of 11/.4 KV ratio, 3 percent will be added both on the maximum demand and the consumption of energy for the purpose of billing. Clause 1 of that provides- "(a) In case the metering of the maximum demand and energy consumption is made on the low voltage side of a distribution transformer of 11/.4 KV ratio, 3 percent will be added both on the maximum demand and the consumption of energy for the purpose of billing. In case of transformers of high voltage the percentage as fixed by the Board shall be binding on the consumer." Mr. Gadodia, learned counsel appearing for the Board relied on this. Mr. Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioners relied on the table of charges for general high tension service of 11 KV, 6.6 KV and 3.3 KV that a consumer of high tension service are to pay and referred to the proviso which is as follows- "Provided that for supply of energy at 6.6 K.V. or 3.3 KV an additional charge of 7.5 percent will be levied on the total billed amount including maximum demand charge, and energy charge and not on fuel surcharge and meter rent." He contended that the tariff all which Mr. Gadodia relied does not include 6.6 K.V. or 3.3 K.V. and as the petitioners are high tension consumer of 6.6 K.V. the tariff relied upon by Mr. Gadodia shall have no application. 6. It is not in dispute the electrical energy is transmitted at high voltage. When the voltage is stepped down, there is loss of energy and that is sought to be recovered from the consumer. It is also not in dispute that the petitioners' service is high tension service of 6.6 K.Y. The two provisions with which we are concerned have been noticed above. 7. Mr. Agarwal contended that for the loss that the Board may suffer for stepping down high voltage to low voltage, the petitioners are already paying an additional charge of 7.5 percent and it can not be made to pay again an additional charge of 3 percent. 8. For the purpose of supplying energy, 11 KV may be stepped down to 6.6 KV or 3.3 KV for the purpose of supplying energy from 11KV at 6.6 KV or 3.3 KV, an additional charge of 7.5% which has been noticed above, will be levied. 8. For the purpose of supplying energy, 11 KV may be stepped down to 6.6 KV or 3.3 KV for the purpose of supplying energy from 11KV at 6.6 KV or 3.3 KV, an additional charge of 7.5% which has been noticed above, will be levied. This is clear and admitted by both the parties that because of stepping down for supplying energy at 6.6 KV or 3.3 KV the Board suffers loss of energy and that is sought to be recovered from the consumer, whose supply of energy is at 6.6 KV or 3.3 K.V. 9. Energy to a consumer may also be supplied by stepping down high voltage to 11 KV. It will appear from clause 1 of the special conditions and charges applicable to high tension service quoted above that there is no mention of 6.6 KV or 3.3 K.V. From 11 K.V. the energy may straight away be stepped down to 4 K.V. This was not disputed by the respondents. The consumer who gets supply at 4 K.V. from the transmission line of 11 K.V. is required to pay 3 percent interims of clause 1 quoted above. Board can pot charge additional amount for loss of energy twice i.e. 7, 5 percent and again 3 percent. On that account consumer shall pay either additional 3 percent or 7.5 percent. I am of the opinion that clause 1 applies to the consumers who are supplied energy at. 4 KV after stepping down transmission from 11KV and not to the consumers who are provided supply at 6.6 KV or 3.3 KV the petitioners who are supplied energy at 6.6 K.V. are liable to pay additional charge of 7.5 percent. They are not liable to pay 3 percent under clause 1 of the special conditions and charges available to high tension services. 10. In the result, this application is allowed and annexure 4 so far it requires the petitioners to pay an additional charge of further 3 percent besides 7.5 percent is quashed, Let a writ of prohibition be issued to the respondents directing them not to give effect of that part of annexure 4 in which 3 percent additional charge was also included. Consequently the respondents are directed to refund the amount recovered from the petitioners as additional charge at the rate of 3 percent in terms of clause 1 of the special conditions and charges applicable to high tension services or to adjust the same against future bills of the petitioners. There shall be no ORDER :as to costs. Application allowed.