Judgment Radha Mohan Prasad, J. 1. In the present writ application the grievance of the petitioner is against raising or the energy bill to the tune of Rs 17.86.331, J4 p, from February, 1993 to May, 1994, which includes Rs.15, 09, 687.34 against the dues towards energy bill from February.93 to January, 1994 including bill for 1992-93 and Rs.2, 76, 344 00 towards energy bill from february, 94 to May 94 for the disconnected period and Rs 300/-as R C. and B. C. charges, fie line of the petitioner has disconnected on account of nonpayment of the said bill on 7th May, 94. Mr. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that in terms of the High Tension Agreement the liability to pay towards. A. M. C. and other charges would considerably reduced as according to him, there have been interruptions in the supply of electric energy during, the said period. 2. Mr. Prasad, learned Counsel for the Board, on the other hand, submits that the petitioner has already filed his objection under clause (B)of the High Tension Agreement before the competent authority and a tentative decision was taken by the Board on 20-11-1992. to which the petitioner. also agreed and put his signature. A photo copy of the said decision has been annexed to counter affidavit as annexure A filed today, which is not disputed by the petitioner. According to the said decision, certain requirements are to be completed by the petitioner for arriving at a final decision by the board, which according to Mr. Prasad, the petitioner has not completed uptill now. Learned Counsel for the board further submits that if the petitioner produces the relevant materials required, as per annexure 8 before the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Dhanbad Area Electricity Board, dbanbad (respondent No 2), then the matter can be finally decided within a shortest possible time provided the petitioner also co-operates. 3. Further, the learned Counsel for the Board submits that as per the annexure a to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, the petitioner agreed to pay 50% of the dues in two instalments-first in December 1992 and the second in January.1993, but the same was not done by the petitioner However, Mr. 3. Further, the learned Counsel for the Board submits that as per the annexure a to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, the petitioner agreed to pay 50% of the dues in two instalments-first in December 1992 and the second in January.1993, but the same was not done by the petitioner However, Mr. Prasad, after taking instructions, is prepared to give after to the petitioner that if he agrees to pay the amount as per annexure a in two instalments as fixed by this Court, then the line of the factory of the petitioner can be restored and the petitioner may be directed to furnish all the required papers as per annexure a within a fortnight from today. 4. In view of the fair stand of the learned Counsel for the Board, the writ application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to pay Rs.2,00,000/-within one week from today, whereupon his line shall be restored by the Board forthwith. The second instalment of Rs.2,00,000/-shall be paid by the petitioner within three weeks thereafter. The petitioner is further directed to furnish all the required papers as per annexure a for the purpose of final decision of his representation filed under clause (3) Within a fortnight from today. If such a representation is filed, the Board shall examine the claim of the petitioner expeditiously and take a final decision assigning reason and then issue a fresh bill accordingly to the petitioner. 5. After the bill is furnished to the petitioner, he may deposit the entire amount or request the competent authority for fixing of instalments and if such a representation in made within one week of the receipt of the bill, then the competent authority may consider his prayer sympathetically. In any case the petitioner must deposit the amount due within the time fixed by the competent authority any in case of failure of any of the aforementioned terms by the petitioner, the Board will be at liberty to disconnect the line against. The payment should be made through bank draft. The writ application is disposed of accordingly. Order accordingly.