Judgment Loknath Prasad, J. 1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the portion of supplementary bills raised by the Electricity Board in respect of consumer No. R/2252 for the period February 1990 to May, 1990, that is Annexures 4 to 7. 2. The Fact, in short, for the purpose of this application is that the petitioners-factory was inspected on 25.10.1989 by the Vigilance wing of the Electricity Board and it was detected that the meter installed in the factory was running slowly, that is, towards lesser side to the extent of 5.493%. Accordingly, on the Vigilance report a fresh bill was raised making supplementary claim in the extent of about 5% of the energy consumed and previously already mentioned in the bill, mainly on the ground that the meter was defective and running slowly. So far the supplementary demand for excess payment of energy charges to the tune of about 5% for the period February, 1982 to September, 1989 are concerned, the petitioner-company preferred a separate writ application questioning the validity of raising of the supplementary bill bearing CWJC No.560/90 R. Subsequently 5% additional charge was also incorporated in the regular bill for the month of February, 1990 to May. 1990, that is, for February. 1990 a sum of Rs. 13972; for March, 1990 a sum of Rs. 10187.00 ; For April, 1990 for Rs. 12643.00 and for May, 1990 for Rs. 13322.00 , that is, 5% in excess of the consumption shown in the meter. The petitioner got grievance only to the extent of this excess charging to the tune of about 5% on the report of the Vigilance wing of the Board. In this writ application the period involved is only from February, 1990 to May, 1990. 3. In the other writ application, for similar additional claim to the extent of 5%, the period involved was from February, 1982 to September, 1989. In this writ application the period involved is only from February, 1990 to May, 1990. 3. In the other writ application, for similar additional claim to the extent of 5%, the period involved was from February, 1982 to September, 1989. The writ application bearing No. 560/90R was disposed of by a Bench of this Court and the writ application was allowed with this observation and direction that if the meter was defective then only on the basis of the Vigilance wing of the Board, authorities of Electricity Board are neither justified nor competent to raise the quantum of the bill to the extent of approximately 5% and it was also held that only the Electrical Inspector is the competent authority under Section 26(6) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 to decide about the correctness of the meter and also about the modalities in such a situation for raising of the bill including the billing can be made if the meter is defective on the basis of average bills of three months prior to the detection of the meter being defective. So in view of the decision recorded in CWJC 560/90R and this matter is squarely covered, so this writ application is also allowed in part and the claim of additional amount to the tune of Rs. 13972.00 for February, 1990; Rs. 10187.00 for March 1990; Rs. 12643.00 for April, 1990 and Rs. 13322.00 for May, 1990 as contained in Annexure 4 to 7 is hereby quashed with this direction that the Electricity Board is at liberty to refer the matter to the Electrical Inspector on the ground that the meter was defective or running slowly and if the Electrical Inspector after due verification will come to a conclusion that the meter was defective or running slow, then in that contingency he will assess and determine the modalities in respect of the energy consumed by the petitioner company which the petitioner-company will pay to the Board according to Rules and excess amount has been paid, then the petitioner will be entitled for the refund or adjustment against future bill so far this portion of the amount is concerned. 4. Accordingly this writ application is allowed in the manner indicated above.