Respondent / complainant applied for an agricultural electricity connection to the petitioner / opposite party for his tube-well. Petitioner / opposite party issued a demand note for Rs.54,650/- on 06.08.2004 which amount was paid by the respondent / complainant and electricity connection was installed. After the installation of the electric connection, petitioner again issued a demand note for Rs.14,950/-. Being aggrieved, respondent / complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum. District Forum allowed the complaint and quashed the additional demand notice for Rs.14,950/- and directed the petitioner to pay Rs.3,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/- towards litigation expenses. Being aggrieved petitioner filed an appeal before the State Commission which was dismissed by the impugned order. Admittedly, the respondent had paid Rs.54,650/- as per demand note dated 6.08.2004. Electricity connection was released to the respondent / complainant on 29.10.2004. Subsequently a demand was created by the petitioner on 24.11.2004 on the basis of revised policy no. 8351 dated 6.11.2004 issued by the petitioner. The State Commission after taking note of the judgement of the Honle Supreme Court in the case of unjab State Electricity Board & Ors. V. Harvinder Singh [AIR 2006 Supreme Court 973]has upheld the order passed by the District Forum. Respondent is not present. As the amount involved is very little, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. Otherwise also, policy came into effect after the release of the electricity connection in favour of the respondent / complainant. The policy issued subsequent to the release of the electricity connection would not be applicable. Dismissed.