JUDGMENT : (1) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged order dated 29.08.2003 passed by the Appellate Committee of the respondent Electricity Company, in so far as the Appellate Committee has not granted the benefit of exclusion of number of days of strike period and holidays observed by the petitioner as per the list (Annexure C) from the disputed bill and also prayed to remand the matter to the Appellate Committee for considering the matter afresh. Petitioner has also prayed for further relief directing the respondent not to effect any further recovery of the disputed bill and also further direction not to disconnect the electricity supply of the petitioner. (2) The facts of the case are that the petitioner, a proprietary firm, is engaged in the business of weaving of yarn purely on job work basis. That the petitioner was having power connection with the contract load of 20 H.P. under service No.12716/01838/3. (3) Record further reveals that a team of the officers of the respondent Company carried out checking at the factory premises of the petitioner on 10.05.2002 wherein it was found that there is tampering of the meter and therefore the petitioner was issued a supplementary bill amounting to Rs.1,16,237/for 15,273 units. It is also matter of record that on the date of checking i.e. 10.05.2002 the meter installed at the premises of the petitioner was removed after drawing a panchnama. That the said meter was sent for laboratory test and the test was conducted on 20.10.2003 in presence of the petitioner, on the basis of such report the petitioner was asked to pay the supplementary bill as issued by the respondentCompany. (4) Being aggrieved by the said supplementary bill, the petitioner made payment of 30% of the amount of the dispute bill i.e. Rs.48,625/and preferred an appeal before the Appellate Committee of the respondent Company. That the petitioner made written submission before the appellate authority, more particularly urged that the petitioner be given benefit of 60 days as well as period during which Federation of Gujarat Weavers Association was on strike. That the Appellant Committee by the impugned order gave benefit of staggering of 13 days and 06 days as holidays while partly allowing the appeal filed by the petitioner and confirmed the rest of the supplementary bill. Hence, the present petition. That the Appellant Committee by the impugned order gave benefit of staggering of 13 days and 06 days as holidays while partly allowing the appeal filed by the petitioner and confirmed the rest of the supplementary bill. Hence, the present petition. (5) By order dated 11.10.2004 this Court admitted the matter and passed the following order: “Rule. By way of adinterim relief it is directed that the respondent Board shall not disconnect the power connection of the petitioner on the following conditions: [a] the petitioner shall pay the outstanding dues of the respondent Board in respect of the supplementary bill and the delay payment charges, if any, in six equal monthly installments, starting from 1st of November 2004. [b] If any default is committed on the part of the petitioner in making the payment as mentioned above, it will be open for the respondent to disconnect the power connection of the petitioner without any further orders of this Court. [c] pending this petition the petitioner shall not transfer the unit and/or the property without the permission of this Court. [d] The petitioner shall pay the monthly consumption bill regularly. [e] The petitioner shall file an undertaking in these proceedings to the above extent within a period of 15 days from today.” (6) During pendency of this petition, erstwhile Gujarat Electricity Board (GEB) is converted into Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company Limited and therefore, as per the order passed by this Court in Civil Application No.13214 of 2009 dated 16.12.2009, such substitution of the respondent was permitted. (7) Heard Mr. Daxesh Patel for Mr. B.T.Rao, learned advocate for the petitioner, and Ms. Lilu Bhaya, learned advocate for the respondent Company. (8) Learned advocate for the petitioner has taken this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present petition and has also drawn attention of this Court to the impugned order as well as the order dated 12.09.2003 passed by the very Appellate Committee in Appeal No.A/72/2003, being appeal filed by M/s. Ashok Texturisers, Karanj, Surat. It is vehemently submitted that the petitioner ought to have been given benefit of strike period as well as the remaining staggering days as the petitioner has not utilized the electric power during that period. It is vehemently submitted that the petitioner ought to have been given benefit of strike period as well as the remaining staggering days as the petitioner has not utilized the electric power during that period. It is submitted that even if it is construed that the petitioner is guilty of tampering with the meter, the petitioner is entitled to reduction of days while considering the ABCD formula. It is therefore submitted that the present petition be allowed as prayed for. (9) Per contra, learned advocate for the respondent Company has submitted that the impugned order is legal and proper and does not require any interference of this Court in its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that considering the facts of the case, more particularly the fact that even during the strike period consumption of electric power is recorded, the Appellate Committee has come to a finding of fact that the petitioner has not entitled for any reduction of days in relation to the strike period. It is further submitted that considering the facts of the case similarly the Appellate Committee has come to a finding of fact and has given benefit of reduction of 13 days as part of the staggering days and 06 days as holidays. It is submitted that thus the Appellate Committee has committed no error, much less error apparent on face of record, which requires any interference of this Court by way of judicial review. It was therefore submitted that the present petition is meritless and deserves to be dismissed. No other or further submissions are raised by learned advocate for the parties. (10) Upon considering the submissions made by the learned advocate for the parties and on perusal of the impugned order as well as documents on record, it appears that the checking squad of the respondent Company visited the factory premises of petitioner on 10.05.2002 and a check list came to be prepared, which is signed by the representative of the petitioner, wherein it is clearly mentioned that there is tampering with the meter. Further the laboratory report also indicates that there is tampering with the meter. The Appellate Committee on considering such material on record has observed that the petitioner has tampered MMB seal as also meter body seals. Further the laboratory report also indicates that there is tampering with the meter. The Appellate Committee on considering such material on record has observed that the petitioner has tampered MMB seal as also meter body seals. It is submitted that there is serious tampering of internal mechanism of the meter, which is not explained by the petitioner. It may further be noted that even otherwise as per the prayers prayed for by the petitioner in the present petition the same is only limited for the days when Federation of Gujarat Association was on strike and for the benefit of the reduction of days in relation to the staggering days and holidays. The Appellate Committee has, after considering the evidence on record, arrived at a finding of fact that substantial consumption has been recorded in the case of the petitioner and therefore has come to the conclusion that the petitioner has not observed strike and hence, the petitioner is not entitled to benefit for relaxation of strike period. Similarly after considering the record the Appellate Committee has given benefit of 19 days i.e. 13 days for staggering and 06 days for holidays. The impugned order as well as the record clearly indicate that the meter is found to be tampered with. In light of such finding of fact having been arrived at by the Appellate Committee on the basis of the record this Court finds no error in the finding of fact arrived at by the Appellate Committee. The petitioner has not been able to establish that there is any error which warrants interference of this Court in its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This Court is not sitting in appeal against the findings arrived at by the Appellate Committee. Reliance placed for by the petitioner on an identical case decided by the Appellate Committee does not carry the case of the petitioner any further as the findings of fact arrived at by the Appellate Committee in the said case are as per the record of the said case and the same cannot be compared with the case of the petitioner wherein the Appellate Committee has come to a finding of fact that during strike period substantial consumption has been recorded in case of the petitioner. (11) In light of the aforesaid, the present petition fails and is hereby dismissed. RULE discharged. (11) In light of the aforesaid, the present petition fails and is hereby dismissed. RULE discharged. Interim relief, if any stands vacated. There shall be no order as to costs.