RAMA JOIS, J. ( 1 ) IN this petition, the petitioner has questioned the legality of the demand of Rs. 29,175-90by the respondents against the petitioner. ( 2 ) THE petitioner has come up for preliminary hearing after notice to the respondents. Byconsent of the Counsel appearing for the parties,it is taken up for hearing. ( 3 ) THE impugned endorsement reads:"with reference to the above, I write to state that as a sum of Rs. 29,175-90 has been pointedout as short claim due to less average has beentaken. The amount of the short claims Rs. 29,175-90 may please by paid within 30 days fromthe date of receipt of this letter failing which actionmay be taken to disconnect the installation under Power Supply Rules. "as can be seen from the above endorsement, the amount demanded from the petitioner is on the basis of the audit report. According to the audit report there was a short claim of rs. 29,175-90 from the petitioner and therefore it was being demanded. ( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the Judgment of this Court in Writ Petition no. 4821 of 1978, decided on 10-8-1987 in which a view was taken that no amount can be demanded on the basis of the Audit report. The learned Counsel for the Board submitted that the very decision was taken in appeal before the supreme Court in S. L. P. No. 2376 of 1988 and the Supreme Court having regard to the facts while rejecting the S. L. P. observed that if during the Audit it was disclosed that the bills have not been properly made it was always open for the board to rectify the bills. ( 5 ) THUS, there can be no doubt that if any mistake has been committed in preparing the bills that mistake always can be corrected and particularly so when it was pointed out at the time of audit. The only question for consideration is, in such an event it is the duty of the respondents having regard to the rules of natural justice, to inform the party concerned as to how there was a mistake in preparing the bills and what was the amount of short claim and give an opportunity to the party to have his say in the matter. In the present case, before making the demand, no particulars have been given and no opportunity has been given to the petitioner. ( 6 ) IN the result, the writ petition is allowed, annexure-A is set aside leaving liberty for the respondents to furnish all the details relating to the short claim and to decide the matter after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to have his say in the matter. The respondents are directed to restore'the supply of electric energy on the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs. 5,000- 00. Further action shall be taken in the light of the final decision. Writ Petition allowed. --- *** --- .