JUDGMENT R.R. Prasad, J. 1. Through this writ application the petitioner has prayed for restoration of its electric connection which has been disconnected on the allegation of electricity being consumed stealthily by making pilferage in the electric meter. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner having installed a Mill for preparing Chura (flattened rice) took electric connection for the load of 45 H.P and then the petitioner started running his Mill smoothly and went on making payment of electric bills till February, 2008. However, on 7.5.2008 some officials of Electricity Department came and allegedly found electric energy being consumed stealthily after tampering with the meter and lodged the case which was instituted as Deoghar Town P.S. case No. 106 of 2008 under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 135 of the Electricity Act and in the said first information report the amount of loss which the Board is said to have suffered was shown to the tuna of Rs. 8,83,000/- which, in any view of the mater, can be said to be too excessive as the petitioner since inception of Mill never consumed electric energy worth more than Rs. 10,000/- and as such by any standard loss can never be to the extent of Rs. 8.83 lacs and therefore, it is evidently clear that the amount shown in the first information report is not only excessive but also arbitrary and moreover, copy of the order under which the amount of loss was assessed provisionally has never been served in terms of provision as contained in Section 126 of the Electricity Act and without serving the copy of the assessment, the Board has disconnected the electric connection and, therefore, action of the respondent is not only against the provision of the statute, rather it is arbitrary and hence, the authority be directed to restore the electric connection immediately. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that under the similar situation when disconnection had been made without making assessment under Section 126 of the Electricity Act the Court has ordered to restore the electric connection on deposit of certain percentage of the amount which the Board has claimed to have suffered loss. In this regard it was pointed out that earlier when similar issue was raised in the case of N.B. Hi Tech Industries v. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and Ors. In this regard it was pointed out that earlier when similar issue was raised in the case of N.B. Hi Tech Industries v. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and Ors. in W.P.(C) No. 2108 of 2008 whereby petitioner had been alleged to have put the Electricity Department to loss to the extent of Rs. 88 lacs, this Court directed the respondents to restore the electricity on the condition of deposit of Rs. 8 lacs. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that not only that even the Honble Supreme Court in a case of Bhalotia Auto Products v. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and Ors. in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 20070 of 2003 has passed the order for restoration of electric connection. 5. As against this, learned Counsel appearing for the Board submits that when inspection was made in the factory, electric energy was found being consumed stealthily by tampering with the meter and, therefore, the case was lodged for theft of electricity and as per the provision as contained in Section 135(1)(a) the authority disconnected the supply of electricity and the tentative loss suffered by the Board due to unauthorized use of electricity was assessed but the copy of the assessment order could not be served as the petitioner immediately rushed to this Court but the same shall be served and the order would be passed immediately and under this situation, action of the authority can never be said to be arbitrary. Learned Counsel further submits that though in certain cases writ application has been disposed of by directing the respondents to restore the electricity on payment of certain percentage of the amount of loss provisionally assessed but in other so many cases the Court has declined to restore the electricity before the Board finally assesses the amount of loss. 6. Waving heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it does appear that on being found the electric energy being consumed stealthily allegedly by the petitioner, a case was registered for theft of electric energy and at the same time tentative amount of loss was shown in the first information report but the said amount has been challenged to be to excessive and has been assessed without any basis. 7. 7. However, this writ application is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to serve a copy of the provisional assessment of the loss for alleged unauthorized use of electricity to the petitioner immediately so that the petitioner may file his objection and then after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner pass a final order of assessment within two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 8. It is made clear that after the final assessment, the Board shall restore the petitioners electric connection forthwith on payment of the amount.