Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited, challenged an order dated 08.06.2016 passed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Nagpur (respondent No.2), which restricted the period of an electricity bill issued to respondent No.1 (a charitable school) to 24 months prior to the issuance of the bill. The facts reveal that respondent No.1 was granted an electric connection on 30.07.2007, but the petitioner did not send any bills for several years. On 27.06.2012, respondent No.1 requested a bill, and on 19.12.2014, a provisional bill of Rs.6,74,093/- was issued without specifying the period. Subsequently, on 10.03.2015, a bill for the period from 01.10.2012 to 28.02.2015 was issued for Rs.6,69,970/-, and on 09.09.2015, another bill of Rs.9,40,070/- was issued. Respondent No.1 approached the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum under Regulation 6.4 of the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and Electricity Ombudsman) Regulations, 2006. The Forum, by its order dated 08.06.2016, restricted the bill period to 24 months prior to issuance. The petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging this order. The High Court heard arguments from both sides. The petitioner argued that the Forum erred in restricting the bill period, while respondent No.1 supported the Forum's order. The Court analyzed Regulation 6.4 and found that the Forum's interpretation was correct and that the order did not suffer from any perversity or lack of jurisdiction. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Forum's order. The Court held that the licensee cannot recover charges for periods beyond 24 months prior to the issuance of the bill.
Headnote
A) Electricity Law - Billing Limitation - Regulation 6.4 of MERC Regulations 2006 - The Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum restricted the period of the electricity bill to 24 months prior to issuance, holding that the licensee cannot recover charges for periods beyond 24 months. The High Court upheld the order, finding no error in the Forum's interpretation of Regulation 6.4. (Paras 3-6) B) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India - The High Court declined to interfere with the Forum's order as it was not perverse or without jurisdiction. The Court held that the Forum's decision was based on a reasonable interpretation of the regulations. (Paras 1, 6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum was correct in restricting the period of the electricity bill to 24 months prior to issuance of the bill under Regulation 6.4 of the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and Electricity Ombudsman) Regulations, 2006.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum dated 08.06.2016.
Law Points
- Electricity billing limitation period
- Regulation 6.4 of MERC Regulations 2006
- Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum jurisdiction
- Writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India
