This order would dispose of the contempt application filed by the applicant Gulshan Singh in respect of complaint No.28/07 dated 11/4/07. Brief avernments in the application are that opposite party Board issued impunged bill dated 9/3/07 amounting to Rs.8570/- alongwith surcharge of Rs.779/- total bill for Rs.9349/- and same was challenged by him. Opposite parties were also restrained from disconnecting the electric connection in question subject to deposit of Rs.2804/- vide stay order dated 11/4/07. It is further alleged that SDO Incharge of Sub Division Bholath being co-villager of the applicant/complainant nurtured grudge and threatened the applicant that he will get heavy amount of the bill if he does not tender apology before his superiors and later on resulting into instant bill dated 8/7/07 to the tune of Rs.18030/- and again restraint order dated 1/8/07 was passed and violated aforesaid orders dated 11/4/07 and 1/8/07 respectively while disconnecting electric connection in question on 16.2.2008 in the moon though the copies of aforesaid orders were shown to opposite parties' officials by female members of the complainant/applicant. The officials of the opposite parties also took away the meter in question after disconnecting the electric connection. However, on 18/2/08, employees of the Board came and installed another meter bearing No.486429 in the absence of applicant. Thus they committed contempt..<br /> Opposite parties, however, opposed this contempt application. It is pleaded that in fact meter reader of the sub Division noted that meter of the consumer Gurmit Kaur was dead stop, so MCO vide No.96/78363 dated 12/2/08 was issued and concerned J.E. Jaswinder Singh visited the premises of the complainant on 18/2/08 and changed the old meter No.1628451 with final reading 00096 and installed new meter No.486529 with initial reading 336 and the representative of the complainant was present and he signed the MCO. It is denied that MCO was issued in violation of restraint order of this Forum. Opposite parties also filed copy of mCO dated 12/2/08 on the allegation of meter being dead stop and also the entries of consumer and intimation vide postal receipt.<br /> We have heard arguments of counsel for the parties and also gone through the documents on the record. As a matter of fact, the earlier restraint order dated 11/4/07 was limited in operation for the respective period in question. The restraint order was never meant to restrain the functionaries/officials of the Board from performing their statutory duties envisaged under the Sales Regulations and the Electricity Act, 2003 in the event of any mischief/lapses or irregularity allegedly committed by the consumer with respect to electronical equipments i.e. meter etc. The applicant has independent cause of action against the opposite parties if the officials of the Board acted in violation of statutory provisions of the Electricity Act or Sales Regulations in the matter of disconnection. The MCO dated 12/2/08 effected by the officials of the Board and for removal of the old meter no.1628451 and installation of new meter No. 486429 on the purported allegation of meter being dead stop is a subsequent event albeit; during the pendency of the complaint and cannot be construed as violation of the stay order dated 11/4/07. Therefore, finding no merit in the contempt application, the same is hereby dismissed.<br /> <br /> Dated (Surinder Mittal ) ( A.K. Sharma )<br /> 11.3.2008 Member President.