Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, the Executive Engineer and Nodal Officer of Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., challenged the order dated 29.06.2018 passed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF), Nashik, in proceeding bearing no.648/38/17/18/116. The respondent, M/s. Sai Kaveri Petroleum through Vilas Murlidhar Kadu, is a consumer running a petrol pump who obtained electricity supply on 12th July 2011. On 20th September 2017, upon verification, the petitioner noticed that the respondent was being billed under Industrial Tariff instead of Commercial Tariff, which was the correct category as per Commercial Circular No.175 and the Tariff order dated 16th August 2022 passed by the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (MERC) in Case No.19/2012. Consequently, an assessment bill dated 7th October 2017 for Rs.3,57,810/- was issued. The respondent approached the Internal Grievance Redressal Cell (IGRC) on 4th December 2017, which rejected the grievance, holding that the categorization was proper. The respondent then approached the CGRF, which set aside the IGRC order and directed the petitioner to refund the amount recovered from the respondent. The petitioner contended that the CGRF exceeded its jurisdiction by directing refund without considering the limitation period under Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003, which provides that no sum due from any consumer shall be recoverable after a period of two years from the date when such sum became first due. The court analyzed the facts and found that the reclassification was valid and the CGRF's order was without jurisdiction. The court set aside the CGRF order and allowed the writ petition, restoring the IGRC order. The court held that the CGRF failed to consider the limitation period and that the assessment bill was within the limitation period.
Headnote
A) Electricity Law - Tariff Categorization - Reclassification of Consumer - Commercial Circular No.175 and MERC Tariff Order dated 16.08.2022 - The petitioner, an electricity distribution company, reclassified the respondent's petrol pump from Industrial to Commercial tariff based on applicable circulars and tariff orders. The respondent challenged the assessment bill before the Internal Grievance Redressal Cell (IGRC), which upheld the reclassification. The Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) set aside the IGRC order and directed refund, which was challenged. Held that the reclassification was proper and the CGRF exceeded its jurisdiction by directing refund without considering the limitation under Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 (Paras 2-6). B) Electricity Law - Limitation - Section 56(2) of Electricity Act, 2003 - Refund of Dues - The CGRF directed refund of the differential amount for a period beyond two years from the date of assessment bill. The court held that under Section 56(2), no sum due from any consumer shall be recoverable after a period of two years from the date when such sum became first due. The CGRF failed to consider this limitation period, and thus its order was unsustainable. Held that the CGRF's order directing refund was without jurisdiction and set aside (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) had jurisdiction to direct refund of differential tariff amount beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003, and whether the reclassification of the respondent's petrol pump from Industrial to Commercial tariff was valid.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 29.06.2018 passed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Nashik, is set aside. The order passed by the Internal Grievance Redressal Cell (IGRC) is restored. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Law Points
- Electricity Act
- 2003
- Section 56(2) limitation period
- Tariff categorization
- Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum jurisdiction
- Commercial Circular No.175
- MERC Tariff order
