JUDGEMENT Oral Justice Arun Kumar Goel (Retd.) President: Respondents as consumers having felt that there was deficiency in services by the appellants in not being provided requisite connection were forced to file complaint before the District Forum below, against the appellants. 2. There case was simple, that they had applied for the grant of 20 kv load for starting pre-cured Tyre Retreading Unit at Darlaghat. With a view to establish this unit they got the project report prepared. And after completion of all the formalities they applied for sanction of requisite load with the respondents. They also deposited the necessary fee payable in that behalf, alongwith furnishing the necessary details etc. finally on 2.5.1996 parties entered into an agreement for supply of 20 Kv load. They also signed document of additional condition of supply. After needful having been done, admittedly connection was released only for a period of 3 months that too for 7 Kv only. This was extended for a short while Thus released load of 7 Kv was of no use, as it would not meet the need of 20 kv. Fact remains that matter remained under correspondence between the different functionaries of the HP. State Electricity Board. One such communication Annexure R-4 was to the following effect:- "Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board. No. DES/ER-3/96-97-977-79 Dated:6-11 -96. To The Executive Engineer. Electrical Division, HPSEB, Arki, Sub: No objection certificate. 3. Please refer to letter No. 181338(A) 96-97-12617-21 dated 25.10.96 from the Executive Engineer Electrical Division, HPSEB, Bilaspur on the above cited subject vide which he has issued no objection certificate for release of 33 kv load in favour of M/s Darla Trade Partner during off peak load hours on 11 kv Namohal Darlaghat feeder. 4. In this context it is worth mentioning here that the sub-Divisional Officer Namhol vide his letter No. NES-E-24/96-1792-93 dated 27.6.96 had shown his in ability to release 20 kv load in favour of M/s Trishool Tyre Cold Retreading on the same feeder with plea that Namhol-Darlaghat feeder is already over loaded which has already been intimated to your office vide this office letter No. DES-W-4/96-97-927 dated 19.10.96. It is therefore, requested to advise this office the action to be taken as there is probability that first consumer i.e. M/s Trishool Tyre Cold Retreading may knock at the door of the court of law." (Emphasis Supplied). 5. It is therefore, requested to advise this office the action to be taken as there is probability that first consumer i.e. M/s Trishool Tyre Cold Retreading may knock at the door of the court of law." (Emphasis Supplied). 5. It was admitted at the time of hearing on behalf of the appellants the respondents were earlier applicants in point of time, and paper work as completed by them before applying for the sanctioned load. Against sanctioned load of 20 kv, only 7 kv was released. It was also admitted case of the appellant that M/s Darla Traders near the place where the unit of the respondents was in the process of establishment has subsequent to respondent applied for the sanction of electricity connection of 32 kv. Connection 32 kv was admittedly released earlier by the appellants To M/s Darla Traders as compared to the respondents. Connections were being release turn wise subject to fulfillment of other formalities by the applicants like respondents in the present case. 6. Detailed facts have been noted in the order of the District Forum below which is impugned in this appeal. We are not repeating those. Learned counsel for the parties admitted those, as have been recorded. At this stage learned counsel for the appellants hastened to add the holding his client liable for the compensation as detailed in the impugned order, cannot be sustained in this facts and circumstances of this case. Thus according to him the impugned order is bad in law, besides being without any foundation, therefore, he prayed for allowing this appeal and consequently dismissing the complaint after setting aside the impugned order. All these pleas have been controverted by learned counsel for the respondent. He submitted that this is not only a case of clear cut hostile discrimination, but it also shows the high handedness on part of the officers/ officials on the appellant board. These pleas appears to be well founded. Reason being that at the time of hearing it was stand by Mr. Ranjan the feeder from connection was to released in favour of the respondents was over loaded, therefore 20 kv connection was not released in favour of the respondents. Thus the Forum below fell in error in passing the impugned order. In this behalf we may appropriately notice that if the matter had rested here only, we would have accepted the plea of Mr. Ranjan. Thus the Forum below fell in error in passing the impugned order. In this behalf we may appropriately notice that if the matter had rested here only, we would have accepted the plea of Mr. Ranjan. But in the face admitted position that despite deficiency/over loading, 32 kv load was sanctioned and connected in favour of M/s Darla Traders. All pleas to the contrary urged by Mr. Ranjan have no substance and merit rejection. That being the position, discrimination, favouristism and high handedness on the part of the appellants is writ large in the present case. It is well known by now that arbitrariness is anti thesis to fair play, natural justice and good conscious. All actions of the appellant are to be tested on the touch stone of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. They is no case can be allowed to act in an unfair and unreasonable manner. How 32 kv load was sanctioned in favour of M/s Darla Traders as admitted by the appellants, could not be explained by Mr. Ranjan. In all fairness it was incumbent upon the appellants to have satisfied us as to how and why the application (of M/s Darla Traders), which admittedly was later in point of time was not only sanctioned but the full load was connected also. Action of the appellants clearly falsifies its plea that line was over-burdened or over loaded. Load in favour of M/s Darla Traders could only be connected even from some other feeder/line by the appellants, only after the sanctioned load in favour of the respondents had been connected. And in no situation earlier has as been done by the appellants. 7. No other point was urged. 8. In view of the aforesaid discussion there is no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed. No cost. All interim orders passed from time to time shall stand vacated forthwith. Office will send copy of this order free of cost as per rules.