M/S Rainbow Industries v. The Southern Power Distribution Company Of Telangana Ltd.,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.29126 of 2017 ORDER:

The case of the petitioner is that it is a proprietary concern engaged in manufacturing and processing activities like surface cleaning of materials, heat treatment, painting and powder coating of various types of furniture etc., having its processing unit at H.No.7-8-301/A, Gowtham Nagar, Hyderabad, and it was sanctioned service connection under LT III (A-1) category with a contract load of 65 KW and 27 KW respectively. The tariff for each category of Industries will be decided by respective electricity regulatory conditions. But now, the final assessment order is issued on the ground that the activity of the petitioner will come under LT II category but not LT III category. Whether a particular industry comes under LT II category or LT III category is a question of fact.

After determination of that question of fact, the application of the tariff order would come. On the basis of decision on the question of fact, the respondents are entitled to issue the final assessment order. If there is any change in the category, the procedure prescribed in Clause 3.4.1 of General Terms and Conditions of supply has to be followed. It is also the case of the respondents that they can initiate action under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

electricity. What is unauthorized use of electricity is explained in the explanation to the said section and it reads as follows: (a) "assessing officer" means an officer of a State Government or Board or licensee, as the case may be, designated as such by the State Government;

(b) "unauthorized use of electricity" means the usage of electricity- (i) by any artificial means; or (ii) by a means not authorised by the concerned person or authority or licensee; or (iii) through a tampered meter; or (iv) for the purpose other than for which the usage of electricity was authorized."

Even it is assumed that the electricity is being used for the purpose other than for which it was authorized, it also involves the decision on the usage, purpose and relevant category under which it can be classified. The respondents may be taking one point of view and the petitioner may be objecting to the same. A decision has to be arrived in respect of each unit. A broad principle cannot be laid. Such enquiry into facts can be undertaken only after hearing the petitioner and the respondents by a competent authority and in the facts and circumstances of the case, this court fells that the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum constituted under sub-section 5 of Section 42 would be the appropriate authority and this court cannot undertake such an exercise.

In the circumstances, it is a fit case for relegating the matter to the said redressal grievance authority. Now the final assessment order is issued by treating the consumption of electricity of the petitioner under L.T.II category whereas petitioner has been paying electricity under Section LT III category till the final assessment order is issued. It is noticed that the difference between L.T.II and L.T.III category is of 25% if the maximum tariff is taken into account in respect of these two categories. In order to protect the revenue of the respondents and not causing undue loss to the petitioner, this court feels that if the petitioner deposits 25% of the now demanded amount before the competent authority and continue to pay at the tariff applicable under L.T.III category in respect of the unit plus 25% of the difference amount pending disposal of the grievance of the petitioner, the interest of justice would be met.

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with the consent of the counsel for the petitioner as well as counsel for the respondents by remanding the matter to the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum of the respondents. It is open to the petitioner to submit its grievance in writing to the forum to the final assessment order issued by the respondents raising all pleas including the violation procedural requirements based on its activity within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of such complaint, it is open to the respondents to submit their defence before the

concerned forum and after hearing parties, the concerned forum shall dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of three months, after submission of defence by the respondents.

It is needless to observe that the payment of amount by the petitioner during the pendency of the proceedings before the concerned Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum shall be subject to the further orders passed by the said forum. No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________________ (A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J) 30.08.2017 vs