ORDER M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. The moot question that falls for consideration before this Court is as to whether the persons in occupation of premises can be denied supply of electricity by the respondent Board on the ground of existing dues in the name of erstwhile owner or occupier of the same premises. 2. In the instant case, the petitioners have challenged the letter dated 12.10,1999 issued by the Electrical Superintending Engineer intimating the landlord of the petitioners that power in the premises will not be given unless dues of Rs. 58,000/- is cleared and further directed the landlord of the petitioners to clear the dues so that Board may consider the application to give fresh connection to the petitioners shop. 3. The building premises, situated in holding No. 46 of Ward No. 5, Hirapur, Dhan-bad, belongs to one Gouranga Chakraborty. The petitioners have taken the shop premises of the said building on rent from Gouranga Chakraborty. The petitioners case is that the shop in question was earlier occupied by one Shankar Chandra Gorai as a tenant from 1977 to 1982 and during that period the electric connection was given in the name of B.M. Gorai, son of S.C. Gorai, who is neither the tenant nor the landlord and the said tenant consumed the electricity. It is stated that for non- payment of arrears of rent a suit was filed against Shankar Chandra Gorai being Title Suit No. 194/83 in which it was found that one Baban Gorai took the electric connection in the premises in question, in 1999 the shop premises was handed over by the landlord to the petitioners and thereafter the landlord of the petitioners represented before the Assistant Electrical Engineer for providing fresh electric connection in the shop premises of the petitioners. It is stated that dues of Rs. 58,000/- lies in respect of connection No. HMC 6. which stands in the name of erstwhile consumer namely, B.M. Gorai for supply of electricity in the premises In question. 4. The petitioners in writ petition have admitted that there is huge amount of dues lies for consumption of electricity in the shop premises in question. The petitioners have been inducted in the same shop premises as tenants by the landlord Gouranga Chakraborty. It is Gouranga Chakraborty who applied for new electric connection in the same premises which was denied by the respondent- Board by the impugned letter. The petitioners have been inducted in the same shop premises as tenants by the landlord Gouranga Chakraborty. It is Gouranga Chakraborty who applied for new electric connection in the same premises which was denied by the respondent- Board by the impugned letter. Surprisingly, the landlord and owner of the premises has not moved this court challenging the decision of the respondent- Board denying supply of electricity in the premises in question unless dues are cleared. The petitioners admittedly had not applied for electric connection rather they got the application filed through the landlord Gouranga Chakraborty. Be that as it may, admittedly the respondent-Board supplied electricity in the shop premises and there is dues of Rs. 58,000/-. In my opinion, the decision of the respondent-Board denying supply of electricity in the same premises is justified. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon a decision of Isha Marble v. Bihar State Electricity Board, (1995) 2 SCC 648 and submitted that the petitioners or their landlord are not liable to pay the electric dues in respect of the electricity consumed by another person. This question has been considered by me in the case of Rashmi Agarwal v. B.S.E.B. and Ors., CWJC No. 2259/99 (R), disposed of on 24.9.1999. While dismissing the writ application, this Court held :-- "After having heard the learned counsel for the parties. I am of the opinion that the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Isha Marble (supra) does not apply in the facts and circumstances of the present case. It is true that it is the duty and responsibility of the Board to recover the dues from the consumer by taking all possible step within time and due to negligence of the Board in recovery of the dues the subsequent purchaser will not suffer. But at the same time the consumer against whom huge amount of electrical dues is lying cannot be allowed to set up different persons for making an application for supply of electricity in the same premises without liquidating the earlier dues of electricity supplied in the same premises. In the instant case same thing has happened. In one case the Dharmashala was in the ground floor and there was huge amount of electricity dues against it. In order to avoid payment, the Dharmashala was shifted in the first floor and ground premises was converted into shop premises. In the instant case same thing has happened. In one case the Dharmashala was in the ground floor and there was huge amount of electricity dues against it. In order to avoid payment, the Dharmashala was shifted in the first floor and ground premises was converted into shop premises. Similarly in the second case huge amount of electricity dues are lying against the premises belonging to the mother of the petitioner. In the same premises the writ petitioner, who is the son, applied for fresh connection and contended that there is no dues of electricity against him. In the facts and circumstances of the cases if the principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in Isha Marble case (supra) is made applicable then no person would like to pay the electrical dues and in order to deprive the Board they can adopt this method of parting with the premises by one way or other. The respondent-Board is therefore, fully justified in refusing to supply the electricity in the premises on the ground of non- payment of huge amount of dues of electricity supplied in the said premises." 6. Again a similar matter was considered by this Court in the case of Prashant Kumar Gupta v. Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors., (2001) 2 Jhr CR 103. In that case also the petitioner as a tenant applied for electric connection, which was denied by the Board on the ground that a sum of Rs. 59,369/- is lying due for consumption of electricity in the same premises. This Court, relying upon the aforesaid decision, dismissed the writ application. 7. Dismissing this writ application will not serve the purpose for the reason that several writ petitions have been filed and are being filed by the prospective consumers against the refusal by the Board to supply electricity on the ground that huge amount of dues are lying outstanding against the owners or the previous occupiers of the premises. This Court, therefore, by order dated 13.6.2001 had directed the respondent-Board to file supplementary counter affidavit giving details of the period for which the bills have not been paid and also to give the details of the steps taken by the Board for recovery of the dues. This Court, therefore, by order dated 13.6.2001 had directed the respondent-Board to file supplementary counter affidavit giving details of the period for which the bills have not been paid and also to give the details of the steps taken by the Board for recovery of the dues. The Board was also directed to furnish the names of the officers and the staffs who were and are directly responsible for not taking any action for recovery of the dues, The Board avoided to file supplementary counter-affidavit on one pretext or other. This Court, therefore, passed order on 3.7.2001 directing the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Dhanbad to appear in person and file affidavit giving details of the outstanding dues of the Board in the District of Dhanbad. On 12.7.2001 this Court passed the following order : "Pursuant to order dated 3.7.2001 the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer. Jharkhand State Electricity Board has appeared in person. 2. Surprisingly despite repeated orders passed by this Court no supplementary counter-affidavit has been filed disclosing the names of the officers for whose negligence the electric dues have not been realised. This Court takes Judicial notice of the fact that huge amount of electric dues have either become barred or not recovered from the consumers because of laches and negligence of the officers of the Board. The Court may think the desirability of referring the matter to the CBI but before passing appropriate order I direct the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer to file counter-affidavit giving full details of the following : (i) the total dues which has either become barred or could not be recovered within his jurisdiction i.e. Dhanbad Electricity Area Board, (ii) The General Manager shall also give circle-wise statements showing the total dues and also disclose the names of the officers who were or are directly responsible for the recovery of the dues. (iii) The General Manager shall also disclose the names of the officers who were posted in a particular circle as Electrical Executive Engineer/Superintending Engineer for the last three years. (iv) If any statement is made regarding continuance of recovery proceeding, then the description of the cases must be disclosed in the affidavit. Let the matter appear on 19th July. 2001 within first five cases." 8. Pursuant to the aforesaid order a supplementary counter-affidavit has been filed by the General Manager-cum-Chief engineer which indeed shocked the mind of the Court. (iv) If any statement is made regarding continuance of recovery proceeding, then the description of the cases must be disclosed in the affidavit. Let the matter appear on 19th July. 2001 within first five cases." 8. Pursuant to the aforesaid order a supplementary counter-affidavit has been filed by the General Manager-cum-Chief engineer which indeed shocked the mind of the Court. In the supplementary counter-affidavit it is stated that in Dhanbad Electricity Supply Area there are two circles namely Dhanbad and Loyabad. In Dhanbad circle there are three divisions namely Dhanbad. Nirsa and Govindpur. Similarly in Loyabad circle there are three divisions namely Loyabad, Jharia and Chas. It is further stated that each circle remains under the control of Electrical Superintending Engineer and each division remains under the control of Electrical Executive Engineer. Annexure E to the supplementary counter- affidavit is the details of the outstanding dues of the Board till June, 98. From perusal of Annexure E, it appears that in Dhanbad and Loyabad there are altogether 14.728.00 consumers who are defaulter in payment of electric dues. The total outstanding dues as on 30.6.1998 is about Rs. 430.00 crores. For better appreciating Annexure E is reproduced hereinbelow : "Dhanbad Electric Supply Area, Dhanbad--Numbers and dues of disconnected consumers prior to 30.6.1998 __________________________________________________________________ Sl. No. Name of Circle D.S. C.S. L.T.I.S. Total __________________________________________________________________ 1. Dhanbad 4169 2554 621 7344 2. Loyabad 4074 2603 707 7384 __________________________________________________________________ Total 8243 (Nos.) 5157 (Nos.) 1328 (Nos.) 14728 (Nos.) __________________________________________________________________ Due Amounts (Rs. in lacs) __________________________________________________________________ Sl. No. Name of Circle D.S. C.S. L.T.I. S. Total __________________________________________________________________ 1. Dhanbad 504.93 517.50 201.73 1224.16 2. Loyabad 512.86 531.10 166.06 1210.02 __________________________________________________________________ Total 1017.79 1048.60 36779 2434.18 __________________________________________________________________ Sd/A.E.E./Rev./Dhanbad." 9. Annexure F shows the details of the outstanding dues of only Dhanbad circle upto April, 2001. It comes to about Rs. 204.00 crores. Annexure F is reproduced hereinbelow : "Categorywise outstanding dues of Dhanbad Electric Supply Circle. Dhanbad (A nount in Lacs) upto 4/2001 (April 2001) __________________________________________________________________ Sl. No. Category Dhanbad Division Nirsa Division Gobindpur Division Total __________________________________________________________________ (i) D/S 2059.37 258.55 69.38 2378.30 (ii) C/S 1754.99 274.04 77.56 (iii) L.T.I.S. 964.38 433.34 161.30 (iv) H.T. 285.66 12016.36 515.86 (v) Public lighting 256.33 1.01 0.01 (vi) IAS Agriculture 56.99 9.29 32.70 (vii) P.W.W. 1170.10 __________________________________________________________________ Total 6547.72 12992.59 856.81 20397.12 __________________________________________________________________ Sd/A.E.E./R/Dhanbad." 10. Similarly in Loyabad circle the total dues has been shown as Rs. 22675.07 crores. Similarly in Loyabad circle the total dues has been shown as Rs. 22675.07 crores. Annexure F/1 reads as under : "Category-wise outstanding dues of Loyabad Circle Rs. in lacs __________________________________________________________________ Sl. No. Name of Division Amount __________________________________________________________________ 1. Loyabad 58,01.15 2. Jharia 132,29.93 3. Chas 3643.98 __________________________________________________________________ Total 2,26,75.07 __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Sd/A.E.E. 11. In para 10 of the supplementary counter-affidavit, it is stated that in Dhanbad Electric Supply Area at present there are dues with the consumers to the extent of about Rs. 430.00 crores. Annexure G is the details of the officers posted in Dhanbad Electric Supply Circle. The details of which are as follows : "Dhanbad Electric Supply Circle: Dhan-- bad--Name of the officers who were posted in Dhanbad Supply Circle since last three years. (A) Dhanbad Circle Office.--1. Sri Sarda Pd.E.S.E. from 6.3.1997 to 5.4.1999 2. Sri Murli Manohar Pd. E.S.E. from 7.4.1999 to 6.12.1999 3. Sri R.K. Mishra. E.S.E, from 7.12.1999 to 7.3.2001 4. Sri Ramjee Sinha. E.S.E. from 7.3.2001 to till date. (B) Dhanbad Circle (Commercial and Revenue)--1. Sri Paras Nath. E.E.E. (C&R) from 6.1.1992 to 3.10.1997 2. Sri S.K. Singh. E.E.E. (C&R) from 13.12.1997 to 13.3.2001 (C) Dhanbad Supply Division, Dhanbad--1. Sri Ram Suresh Singh. E.E.E. from 4.5.1994 to 19.12.1997 2. Sri R.L. Kamat. E.E.E. from 19.12,1997 to 2.7.1999 3. Sri Chandra Shekhar Singh E.E.E. from 5.7.1999 to 18.1.2001 4. Sri Ramjee Sinha. E.E.E. from 18.1.2001 to till date (D) Govindpur Electric Supply Division--1. Sri Madan Prasad. E.E.E. from 10.10.1995 to 23.10.1998 2. Sri Ramjee Sinha. E.E.E. from 1.11.1998 to 12.12.1998 3. Sri M.A. Khan, E.E.E. from 13.12.1998 to 26.12.1999 4. Sri Minhajuddin Faruque, E.E.E. from 28.12.1999 to till date. (E) Nirsa Electric Supply Division--1. Sri M. Rai, E.E.E. from 31.12.1993 to 3.10.1997 2. Sri Ramjee Sinha. E.E.E. from 4.10.1997 to 18.10.2000 3. Sri P.N. Dewedi. E.E.E. from 19.10.2000 to till date. Sd/Elecl. Superintending Engineer, Dhanbad Elecl. Circle, Dhanbad." 12. Annexure G/1 shows the name of the persons who were posted as Electrical Executive Engineer from 1986-87 to till date. The namess are as follows : "1. Sri R.R. Jha 2. Sri A.K. Sinha 3. Sri Alakh Deo Sinha 4. Sri S.N. Vishwakarma 5. Sri Ram Suresh Singh 6. Sri R.L. Kamath 7. Sri Chandra Shekhar Singh 8. Sri Ramjee Sinha 13. The namess are as follows : "1. Sri R.R. Jha 2. Sri A.K. Sinha 3. Sri Alakh Deo Sinha 4. Sri S.N. Vishwakarma 5. Sri Ram Suresh Singh 6. Sri R.L. Kamath 7. Sri Chandra Shekhar Singh 8. Sri Ramjee Sinha 13. In Loyabad Circle the officers posted have been shown in Annexure H to the affidavit, which reads as under : "Electric Supply Circle, Sijua : Jharia : Loyabad--List of Officers posted under Elecl. Circle. Loyabad. (A) Elecl. Superintending Engineer--1. Sri Sanjay Kr. Sinha from 11/93 to 30.6.1997 2. Sri Sharda Nand Pd. I/C from 1.7.97 to 11/97 3. Sri R.C.P. Singh from 12/97 to 2/99 4. Sri R.P. Singh from 3/99 to 31.1.2000 5. Sri R.K. Mishra (I/C) from 1.2.2000 to 28.2,2000 6. Sri B.K. Dubey from 1.3.2000 to 31.10.2000 7. Sri R.K. Mishra (I/C) from 1.11.2000 to 14.11.2000 8. Sri B, Ram from 15.11.2000 to 2.6.2001 9. Sri V.K. Srivastava from 4.6.2001 to continue (B) Elecl. Executive Engineer (Com & Rev)--1. Sri Parmanand Singh from 11/93 to 12/97 2. Sri V. Roy from 31.8.1998 to continue. (C) Elecl. Executive Engineer/Supply/Loyabad--l. Sri B.C. Roy Choudhary from 22.2.1992 to 19.8.1997 2. Sri S.N. Vishwakarma from 27.8.1997 to 25.8.2000 3. Sri Jagdeep Das (I/C) from 26.8.2000 to 16.10.2000 4. Sri V.K. Srivastava from 16.10.2000 to continue (D) Elecl Executive Engineer/Supply/ Jhoria-- 1. Sri S.C. Mishra from 6/91 to 4/94 2. Sri D.D. Sinha from 5/94 to 11/95 3. Sri Laliteshwar Chy from 12/95 to 11/97 4. Sri Jagdip Das from 12/97 to continue (E) Elecl. Executive Engineer/S/ Chas--1. Sri J.P. Mehta 2. Sri S.P. Singh 3. Sri Bachoo Ram--to 16.9.2000 4. Sri N.K. Choudhary from 19.9.2000 to continue" 14. The affidavit also discloses the names of the Junior Engineer and Assistant Electrical Engineers who were posted during the relevant time in Dhanbad Area Electricity Board, he names have been given in Annexures G/2. G/3 and H. The more surprising and shocking fact is that in Dhanbad Circle only 60 certificate cases have been filed for recovery of only Rs. 6,82,105/- and in Loyabad Circle only 16 certificate cases have been filed. In other words, as against the total number of 14.728 defaulters in Dhanbad Area only 76 certificate cases have been filed till date and no steps whatsoever have been taken by the officers responsible for the recovery of such a huge amount of dues from the consumers. 15. 6,82,105/- and in Loyabad Circle only 16 certificate cases have been filed. In other words, as against the total number of 14.728 defaulters in Dhanbad Area only 76 certificate cases have been filed till date and no steps whatsoever have been taken by the officers responsible for the recovery of such a huge amount of dues from the consumers. 15. Similar situation must be prevailing in other Districts and Area of the State of Bihar and also the State of Jharkhand. More than 1000 crores dues have not been realised nor any steps have been taken against the consumers for recovery of electric dues. 16. This Court will take judicial notice of the fact that whenever people of the State approach this Court with a grievance that there is total failure of the Board in supply of electricity, the Board comes with a plea that because of insufficient quantity of generation sets, transformers and other equipments the Board is not in a position to improve the generation and the supply of electricity. 17. It is the constitutional duty of the High Court to keep all the authorities and Tribunals, while discharging their Judicial, quasi-judicial or statutory function, within the bound of their jurisdiction and to compel them, whenever necessary, to perform the duties enjoined on them by law strictly in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions. This is the only way in which High Court can assist in the maintenance of rule of law which is enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution. No doubt, it is not for the High Court to Interfere with day-to-day work of statutory and other authorities, so long as they remain within their bounds and do their duties as enjoyed on them by law. But when the High Court believes and there are reasons to believe that the collapse and the total failure of such authority in discharge of their statutory obligation is because of the failure of the officers and the employees in discharge of their duties, then the High Court cannot remain a silent spectator rather pass appropriate orders for the investigation of the matter so that the erring officers must be brought to book and appropriate action should be taken against them. 18. 18. By notification dated 11.1.2001 published In the Jharkhand Gazette, the State Government of Jharkhand created Jharkhand State Electricity Board and appointed 10.1.2001 as the date on which the remaining provisions of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 shall come into force in the whole State of Jharkhand. Reading Section 62 of the Bihar Re-organisation Act. 2000, and the Electricity Supply Act. 1948 together, the Jharkhand State Electricity Board, which has already come into existence, is duty bound to take all actions against the erring officers and also the consumers to achieve its goal. 19. As noticed above, thousands and thousands crores lying dues in the hand of consumers have either not been recovered or no steps have been taken for recovery of the dues owing to total failure of the officers of the Board who were and are responsible for the same. The people of this State have been made to suffer on the specious plea of paucity of fund usually taken by the Board whenever matter with regard to improvement in the supply of electricity comes to this court. I, therefore, exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, issue following directions to the Board : (i) The Jharkhand State Electricity Board, within ten days from today, shall constitute a 3 men High Power Committee of independent persons, out of which one member shall be in the rank of Deputy Accountant General nominated by the Accountant General, Bihar/Jharkhand. The second member shall be in the rank of Deputy Manager of MECON so nominated by the C.M.D. MECON and the third member shall be nominated by the Chairman of the Jharkhand State Electricity Board. (ii) The Committee shall investigate and enquire into the matter and submit a detailed report within 30 days thereafter. The report must indicate the total dues of the Board Area-wise and Circle-wise for the last 10 years and also disclose the names of the erring officers for whose inaction and negligence such dues could not be recovered. (iii) On submission of the report by the Committee, the Board shall immediately take action against those erring officers in accordance with law. 20. Writ Petition dismissed.