Prabhakar Mishra vs. The State Of Bihar

CWJC/1663/2026HC PatnaGSTCNR BRHC01006982202612 February 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, Prabhakar Mishra, challenged a show-cause notice issued by the North Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited (NBPCDL) proposing a penalty of Rs. 10,000/-. The notice was based on the petitioner allegedly removing an electricity pole in front of his house. The petitioner also contended that his power supply was disconnected without legal authority and contrary to the Electricity Act and Supply Code, causing him hardship as an elderly person. The respondents, represented by NBPCDL, stated that power supply would be restored if the petitioner paid Rs. 2744/- towards supervision charges at 15% plus GST on the labour cost for erection and dismantling.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to pay Rs. 2744/- towards supervision charges at the earliest. Upon payment, the respondent authority was directed to immediately restore the power supply. The petitioner was to intimate the authorities about the payment, and the authorities were to ensure restoration of power supply within one or two days thereafter. The Court did not explicitly decide on the legality of the show-cause notice for penalty or the initial disconnection, but rather facilitated a resolution for the restoration of power supply. The principle derived is that the Court can facilitate a pragmatic resolution by directing payment of disputed charges to restore essential services, even if the underlying dispute regarding the penalty and disconnection is not fully adjudicated.

Key Issues

1. Whether the show-cause notice for penalty is legally sustainable, considering the petitioner's alleged removal of an electricity pole? 2. Whether the disconnection of power supply was lawful and in accordance with the Electricity Act and Supply Code? 3. What relief can be granted to the petitioner, an elderly person facing hardship due to power disconnection? The petitioner argued that the penalty notice was issued without authority and that the power disconnection was illegal, causing him significant hardship. The respondents, through NBPCDL, submitted that power supply could be restored upon payment of Rs. 2744/- towards supervision charges, including GST, on the labour cost for erection and dismantling, and that no coercive steps would be taken. They did not explicitly address the legality of the initial penalty notice or the disconnection beyond offering a resolution.

Sections Cited

GST

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1663 of 2026 ====================================================== Prabhakar Mishra son of Late Indrasan Mishra, resident of Ward No.-3, Paras Pakri Bazaar, P.S.-Majhaulia, District- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Energy Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The District Magistrate, West Champaran. 3. The Managing Director, North Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited, Patna. 4. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Bettiah, Electric Division, Bettiah, West Champaran. 5. The Junior Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Branch, Sariswa Bazaar, Sikarpur Sub-division, West Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel 4 For the NBPCDL : Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Sudarshan Bharadwaj, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY

ORAL ORDER 2 12-02-2026 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the respondent (North Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited) has issued the impugned notice directing the petitioner to show cause as to why a penalty amount of Rs. 10,000/- should not be levied on the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the said notice has been issued by the authority solely on the premise that the petitioner has removed the electricity pole which was in front of his house. Further, learned counsel has stated that respondents without any 2/3 authority of law and contrary to the provisions of the Electricity Act and the Supply Code have disconnected the power supply of the petitioner and the petitioner being an old aged person of 78 years is facing great hardships. Learned counsel has, therefore, prayed this Hon’ble Court to set aside the impugned notice and direct the respondents to restore the power supply to the petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents (North Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited) on instructions submits that in case the petitioner pays an amount of Rs. 2744/- (Two thousand Seven Hundred Forty Four Rupees only) towards the supervision charges at the rate of 15 % + GST on the labour cost for erection and dismantling, the authorities will restore the power supply to the petitioner and no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner.

Having regard to the above made submissions, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 2744/- at the earliest and on such amount being made, the authority shall immediately restore the power supply. The petitioner shall intimate the authorities about the payment of the above mentioned amount and the authority shall see to it that the power supply is restored within a day or two 3/3 after the amounts are paid by the petitioner.

With the above directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Gauravkr/- (A. Abhishek Reddy , J) U

Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.