The dispute involved between the parties is that the respondent/complainant is a consumer of petitioner’s electricity distribution company. As the complainant wanted to get his factory machinery repaired, he applied for temporary disconnection for the period from March 2006 to September 2006 on 28.2.2006. His request was accepted and the electric connection was disconnected -2- vide Memo dated 27.3.2006. Petitioner issued a notice dated 21.7.2007 whereby an amount of Rs.9,40,000/- was demanded as penalty alleging theft of energy for tampering of seals of the meter. Respondent approached the Superintending Engineer on 31.7.2006 who after thorough investigation held that there was no case of theft of electricity and as such, the penalty imposed upon the complaint was withdrawn. However, the petitioner neither restored the connection of the respondent nor withdrew the notice of penalty for Rs.9,40,000/-. Aggrieved by this, complainant filed the complaint before the District Forum. District Forum allowed the complaint and quashed the notice and directed the petitioner to restore the electric connection of the respondent. Petitioner being aggrieved by the order passed by the District Forum, filed the appeal before the State Commission which has been dismissed by the impugned order. We agree with the view taken by the fora below. Superintending Engineer of the petitioner after getting the meter thoroughly examined, recorded a finding that the respondent was not -3- guilty of theft of energy; that there was no tampering of any kind and somebody in the department was trying to harass the respondent. in view of the enquiry conducted and the finding recorded by the Superintending Engineer, the respondent cannot be held guilty of theft of energy. No case for interference is made out. Dismissed. | 
