Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 352 (CAL)

Swapan Kumar Dey @ Das v. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited

2020-03-04

HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, SANJIB BANERJEE

body2020
JUDGMENT : 1. The matter pertains to the demand of refund of the provisional amount that had been deposited by the appellant consumer pursuant to a provisional assessment made in the year 2006 following the discovery of the alleged theft of electricity by the appellant. 2. Criminal proceedings were instituted against the appellant and the appellant has been acquitted of the charges. However, the appellant had deposited the amount claimed in the provisional assessment. The sum deposited in the year 2006 was about Rs. 71,000/-. 3. Though the criminal proceedings lingered for a long time, it does not appear that any final assessment order has been passed. Section 126(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003 obliges the assessing officer to pass a final order of assessment within 30 days of the date of receipt of service of an order of provisional assessment. Even though the specified period of 30 days can be seen to be directory and not mandatory, what is important is that the final order of assessment should be completed within a reasonable time after affording the consumer an opportunity of hearing. It is possible that the consumer may delay the process and the 30 day period cannot be adhered to; in such a situation, the period specified in the provision has to be read only as directory. 4. However, merely because the time schedule indicated is read to be directory does not imply that the period may be stretched to 10 or 15 years. The provisional assessment in this case was completed in 2006. A notice was issued to the consumer. The consumer did not make any representation against the provisional assessment. It was then incumbent on the assessing officer to complete the final assessment without reference to the consumer or issue a notice to the consumer and complete the final assessment even if the consumer paid no heed to such notice. 5. It is not acceptable that merely because criminal proceedings are pending, there would be an automatic stay of the assessment. Even though the time limit indicated in Section 126(3) of the Act is seen to be directory, the completion of the final assessment cannot be delayed by years. The final assessment needs to be completed contemporaneously, particularly since the evidence would be lost. 6. Even though the time limit indicated in Section 126(3) of the Act is seen to be directory, the completion of the final assessment cannot be delayed by years. The final assessment needs to be completed contemporaneously, particularly since the evidence would be lost. 6. In the present case, there can be little or no evidence left for the assessing officer to be convinced of the receipt of illegal electric supply by the appellant. In any event, whether or not the acquittal was honourable, the appellant has been acquitted of the criminal charges nonetheless. In such a scenario, the exercise of completing the final assessment cannot be undertaken any further, particularly after a delay of 14 years. 7. The distribution company has referred an unreported Division Bench judgment rendered on January 8, 2020 in FMA 71 of 2020 (Umesh Chandra Mondal v. WBSEDCL). In such case, the final assessment was permitted to be competed several years later by such order. However, it does not appear that the time limit under Section 126(3) of the Act was brought to the notice of the Division Bench at the time that the said order was passed. In such circumstances, the relevant order cannot be regarded as an appropriate precedent. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside by observing that no final assessment can now be permitted to be undertaken in respect of a provisional assessment order passed in the year 2006. As a consequence, the amount deposited by the appellant will be refunded to the appellant within four weeks from date failing which the entire money will carry interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of deposit till repayment. 9. FMA 618 of 2020 along with CAN 7458 of 2019 are allowed as above. 10. There will be no order as to costs. 11. Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.