The Nepal Electricity Authority has disconnected electricity to industries that used dedicated trunk lines and did not pay the dues. After the disconnection, some industries have also started paying the dues.

Maruti Cement Industry in Siraha also has arrears of Rs 642.493,992 on its dedicated trunk line. The industry had used the dedicated trunk line from 2073 Shrawan to 2075 Chaitra.

After the NEA sent a letter asking it to pay the arrears, the industry went to court demanding that the NEA's decision be overturned and the bill issued at the previous rate, but Maruti's electricity line was not disconnected. On behalf of the industry, its operator Nandakishore Rathi filed a case in the Siraha District Court on 2077 Shrawan.

In which he has made the Electricity Authority Central Office, the NEA's Mirchaiya Distribution Center and its chief as defendants. However, the court has not yet issued a decision even after five years of the case.

In the absence of a decision on this case, the role of not only the industry and the court, but also the Electricity Authority has been seen as 'unnatural'. After the case was filed in court, a response was filed on behalf of the defendant on 19 Asoj 2077, and a response was also filed in court on 3 Falgun 2077 by the then Managing Director of the Authority, Hitendradev Shakya.

Since then, the case has been going up and down, postponed and removed. According to the court, this case has been repeatedly heard 31 times by 16 Jestha 2081. Of which, the hearing has been postponed 8 times by the Electricity Authority's own legal practitioner and 3 times by the industry.

Similarly, in four hearings, the court has issued orders to examine witnesses, interim orders, orders to examine evidence, orders to submit argument notes, while the court has postponed various other hearings citing reasons such as not being able to see the court itself.

This case has been postponed twice. Based on the application filed by the General Manager of the industry, Manoj Kumar Shrestha, on 2081 Jestha 16, Judge Manoj KC adjourned the case on the same day. Then, the authority again lifted the adjournment on 2081 Asar 9, based on the application of the Mirchaiya Distribution Center.

The next time, on 28 Shrawan 2082, the industry again requested adjournment, and on the same day, the bench of Judge Dr. Prakash Upreti adjourned the case. The last time this case was adjourned was on 2082 Kartik 9, said Radheshyam Yadav, the branch officer of the court. He claims that the delay in the final decision of this case is due to the plaintiff and the defendant.

According to him, the authority had initially written a letter to the industry demanding payment of Rs. 557.2 million 99 thousand 292. However, the then head of the Mirchaiya Distribution Center, Digambar Yadav, accidentally cut off the letter with an outstanding amount of Rs 642.493.992 through another letter on Baisakh 25, 2076, citing an arithmetic error.

He claimed that this created confusion and that the delay in concluding the case was due to the delay in submitting evidence including detailed bills to the court. ‘The court has done its job, but the delay was caused by the plaintiff and the defendant,’ he said, ‘Now the case is in its final stage, it will be resolved soon.’

The Authority, however, has responded that the delay is due to the fact that the case has been postponed twice on the court’s order. However, the latest case has been postponed again and the Authority’s central advocate Rajkumar Pokharel claimed that they are trying to conclude it as soon as possible. "We have provided the documents requested by the court several times, but this case was postponed twice by the court's order, and now it has been postponed again," Pokharel said. "We are working to resolve this as soon as possible."