Respondent/complainant had taken electric connection of 25 HP load.  Vigilance team checked and found the load to be 37.5 HP and accordingly the petitioner raised a demand for Rs.36,875/-.  Respondent/complainant challenged the Vigilance Report by filing Complaint No.138/2002, which was dismissed on 9.1.2004.  Against the said order, respondent filed Appeal No.286/2004 before the State Commission, which has been disposed of by the impugned order.  State Commission has reversed the order passed by the District Forum and quashed the bill raised by the petitioner for the sum of Rs.36,875/-.  The petitioner had not produced the original documents before the District Forum.  State Commission, in its order, has recorded that in the Vigilance Checking Report dated 14.2.2002, it was stated that Khata No.1804/201 of one Dhanna Ram/Nanda Ram had been checked.  While in the same, the name of Ram Chander/Dhanna Ram has also been mentioned.  State Commission had doubt regarding the correctness of the Checking Report prepared by the Vigilance Department.

          We agree with the view taken by the State Commission.  Petitioner did not produce the original Checking Report.  No reasons have been given by the petitioner for not producing the original Vigilance Report.  Since the petitioner failed to produce the original record, respondent was deprived of the opportunity to verify and contest the authenticity of the Vigilance Report.  Otherwise also, the State Commission has doubted the correctness of the Checking Report.  No merits.  Dismissed.