[2025:RJ-JP:32904] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12501/2025 Fakir Mohammad S/o Lal Mohammad, Aged About 69 Years, R/o 420, Azad Mohalla, Jaliya-Ii, Jaliya, Ajmer, Rajasthan- 305625. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Panchsheel Nagar, Makadwali Road, Ajmer Through Its Managing Director. 2. Assistant Engineer, Avvnl, Bijaynagar, Ajmer, Rajasthan. ----Respondents Connected with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12505/2025 Sharwan Kumar Khatik S/o Balu Ram Khatik, Aged About 66 Years, R/o Azad Mohalla, Jaliya, Ajmer, Rajasthan- 305625. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Panchsheel Nagar, Makadwali Road, Ajmer Through Its Managing Director. 2. Assistant Engineer, Avvnl, Bijaynagar, Ajmer, Rajasthan. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12500/2025 Ram Gopal S/o Ramlal Jaat, Aged About 50 Years, R/o New Colony, Masuda, Jalia-Ii, Ajmer Rajasthan- 305625. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Panchsheel Nagar, Makadwali Road, Ajmer Through Its Managing Director. 2. Assistant Engineer, Avvnl, Bijaynagar, Ajmer, Rajasthan. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12503/2025 Shankar Lal Khatik S/o Ramdev Khatik, Aged About 50 Years, R/o. Barli Road, Shikhrani, Ajmer, Rajasthan- 305624 ----Petitioner Versus 1. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Panchsheel Nagar, Makadwali Road, Ajmer Through Its [2025:RJ-JP:32904] (2 of 3) [CW-12501/2025] Managing Director 2. Assistant Engineer, Avvnl, Bijaynagar, Ajmer, Rajasthan ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12504/2025 Mohammad Idu S/o Amir Mohammad, Aged About 59 Years, R/o. Khajur Mohlla, Tehsil- Masuda, Jaliya, Ajmer, Jalia-Ii, Rajasthan- 305625 ----Petitioner Versus 1. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Panchsheel Nagar, Makadwali Road, Ajmer Through Its Managing Director 2. Assistant Engineer, Avvnl, Bijaynagar, Ajmer, Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yellop Singh with Mr. Anuj Sharma For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 21/08/2025 Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are aggrieved of the demand notice dated 09.07.2025, which was issued subsequent to inspection/audit. It is further submitted that allegations qua unauthorized dues of electricity were leveled. Moreover, by misclassifying the category from agriculture to non-domestic service for a period retrospective from the year 2019, demand is raised, without providing opportunity of hearing, thereby violating principle of natural justice. Further, reliance is placed upon the order passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in SBCWP No. 10220/2025 and [2025:RJ-JP:32904] (3 of 3) [CW-12501/2025] 10230/2025, wherein, interim protection is granted vide order dated 11.07.2025. Heard and considered. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court has noted that that demand, differently classifying the agriculture connection to non-domestic, is placed on record; that the respondents have alleged the petitioners qua unauthorized use of electricity and therefore the demand notice was issued after the inspection; orders relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners are distinguishable in facts and circumstances. Taking note of the aforementioned, this Court is of the view that the said demand can be assailed before the Settlement Commission or appropriate competent authority, as per the governing Act and Regulations, and the same is affirmed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, however, same terms and conditions are applied as per the statutory rules for want of alternative efficacious remedy. In light of the above said, this Court is inclined to dispose of the present petitions with liberty to the petitioners to approach appropriate Settlement Commission, if there is any delay, same be condoned. It is made clear that no prejudice be caused to either of the parties, on account of the present order. Accordingly, the present petitions are disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J Pooja /6,7,17-19