Before the Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission s2

BEFORE THE UTTAR PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Quorum

Shri Desh Deepak Verma, Chairman Shri S.K. Agrawal Member

In the matter of:

Sub:Petition under section 142 of the Electricity Act 2003 for non compliance of the CGRF’s order in accordance with section 14 of UPERC (Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum & Electricity Ombudsman) Regulation 2007.

M/s Greenland fruits & Vegetables Pvt. Ltd. C/o Dr. Shashilata Chauhan, (MD), Mohanpura-Kasganj, Dist. Kanshiram Nagar. Petitioner Versus

P.R Singh, Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division, Kasganj. Respondent

ORDER ( Hearing on 22.03.2017)

The petitioner M/s Greenland fruits & Vegetables Pvt. Ltd.filed a complaint under section 142 of the Electricity Act 2003 for non compliance of CGRF’s order dated 28.09.2013 in appeal no. 372/2013/Kasg.

The operating part of the CGRF’s order dated 28.9.2013 is: **ifjokn lWa0 372@[email protected] Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gSA

ifjokfnuh ds la;kstu fuxZeu ds le; ls gks jgh oksYVst dh leL;k dk fopkj.k Qksje Lrj ij dkyckf/kr gksus ds dkj.k fopkj.kh; ugh gSA

of 23 foi{kh }kjk izsf’kr izksfotuy jktLo fu/kkZj.k fujLr fd;k tkrk gS] ,oa foi{kh dks vknsf”kr fd;k tkrk gS fd fnukad 31-7-2011@26-8-2011 dks miHkksDrk ehVj esa vafdr ehVj jhfMax ds vk/kkj ij ifjokfnuh dks “kq) ns;d ifjokfnuh } kjk tek djk;h x;h /kujkf”k dks lek;ksftr djrs gq;s 15 fnu ds vUnj Hkqxrku gsrq miyC/k djk;saA foi{kh }kjk ftykf/kdkjh dklxat dks ifjokfnuh ds fo:) /kkjk & 5 ds vUrxZr izksohtuy jktLo fu/kkZj.k ds vk/kkj ij fuxZr fMek.M uksfVl fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA* The Commission on 20.2.2014 passed the following order: “ The respondent submitted that the writ petition is pending before the Hon’ble High Court. The petitioner submitted that the order has not been complied for the last six months and no stay order has been granted by the Hon’ble High Court.

The Commission directed the Executive Engineer to appear before it alongwith the stay order of the Hon’ble High Court, if any and apprise the Commission of the latest position of the Court Case.

The next date of hearing shall be intimated separately.”

The Hon’ble High Court in its order dated 28.4.2014 issued the following directions:

“ We find from the aforesaid circumstances that when the Commission is already seized the complaint-petition which is in relation to the order of the Forum and on the other hand, the respondents are questioning very jurisdiction of the Forum to pass the order which is under challenge by them in a writ petition, it would be appropriate that the Commission before whom the matter is pending, should consider the dispute the raised by the petitioner before it including the issue of the impugned demand notices to the petitioner since it can record its finding on these highly disputed facts between the parties on the basis of record and evidence available before it. For the purpose of grievance of the petitioner with respect to the impugned demand notices, the Commission may consider the eminent danger to which the petitioner is faced of lodging an F.I.R. against him under the impugned demand notices. In case the petitioner files certified copy of this order before the Commission within a period of one week from today, along with suitable application and raises his grievance against the impugned Page 2 of 23 demand notices, the Commission may pass order in accordance with law keeping in mind in the eminent threat of lodging the F.I.R. against the petitioner against the impugned demand notices.

It is made clear that we have not expressed our opinion either on question of jurisdiction of the Forum or on the highly factual dispute of consumption of electricity and raising of demand notices in this writ petition which can be better done by the Commission.”

The Commission on 03.06.2014 passed the following order:

“Shri A. S. Rakhra submitted that the petition filed by the licensee before the Hon’ble High Court is still pending before it and Commission may not like to hear the matter on merits, as the matter pertains to individual consumer.

Commission also directs the respondents not to take any coercive action including lodging of F.I.R and to maintain status quo until the matter is heard by the Commission on 4th May, 2014. in which Executive Engineer shall personally be present.”

The Commission on 03.07.2014 issued the following order: The Commission directed the Executive Engineer to handover the revised bill to the petitioner. On receiving the revised bill the petitioner requested two weeks time to file counter if any.

The Commission grants two weeks time to the petitioner to file the counter.

The petitioner submitted the set of objection on the bill produced to him by the licensee is vide letter dated 3.7.2014. The reply of the licensee on the objection raised by the petitioner is also been received.

The Commission on 10.9.2014 passed the following order: “The Commission directed the respondents to restore the connection within five days of deposit of 50 % of the bill amount as per the amended bill handed over to the petitioner during the last hearing.

of 23 The case is remanded back to CGRF, Aligarh and the petitioner may approach CGRF, Aligarh regarding the bill amount. The Pleadings may be made afresh regarding the bill. The CGRF, Aligarh shall decide the case within ten days and the petitioner will deposit the amended bill amount in next five days and in this case, the respondent shall reconnect the supply within next twenty four hours thereafter. Although the Commission has accepted the unconditional apology of the Executive Engineer however his conduct shall be looked into by CGRF while examining the bills submitted by him and if there has been a deliberate effort to harass the petitioner, the CGRF may take punitive action.

The Commission makes it clear that CGRF may take independent view for penalty, if any.”

The Petitioner vide letter dated 3.7.2014 informed that he has deposited Rs. 3,54,000 being 50 % of the impugned amended bill. The petitioner further requested to reconnect the connection as per the orders of the Commission but respondent categorically refused vide letter dated 6040 dated 27.9.2014 and advised the consumer to approach CGRF.

The Commission is requested by the petitioner to take necessary action against the erring Executive Engineer because the Commission’s order has not been complied with by him.

It was informed by the respondent counsel that CGRF meanwhile, has passed an order dated 3.11.2014 in this case, copy of which is now available on file. The Commission, while remanding the case to CGRF, had also asked them to look into Executive Engineer’s conduct.

The relevant portion of the order of CGRF dated 3.11.2014 on this point is as follows:

¼n½ foospuk fnukad 04-06-2014 dks ek0 vk;ksx ds le{k izkIr djk;s x;s bill of account ij ek0 vk;ksx }kjk fuEu vkns”k fn;s x;s%&

of 23 “The commission directed the respondents to restore the connection within five days of deposit of 50% of the bill amount as per the amended bill handed over to the petitioner during the last hearing” * ifjokfnuh }kjk ek0 vk;ksx ds mijksDr vkns”k fnukad 10-09-2014 ds vuqikyu esa fcy /kujkf”k #0 7]08]144-00 ds lkis{k 50% /kujkf”k fnukad 24-09-2014 dks foi{kh dk;kZy; eas tek djk nh x;hA ijUrq foi{kh }kjk ifjokfnuh dk la;kstu ek0 vk;ksx ds mDr vkns”k dh voekuuk djrs gq;s Qksje esa lquok;h fnukad 20-10-2014 rd iquZla;ksftr ugha fd;k x;k ftlds fy, ifjokfnuh }kjk ek0 vk;ksx ds le{k viuk izR;kosnu ¼dkxt la0 23 yxk;r 25½ izLrqr fd;k tk pqdk gS A foi{kh us ifjokfnuh ds la;kstu dks iqu% la;ksftr djus gsrq fnukad 04-06-2014 eks ek0 vk;ksx ds le{k ifjokfnuh dks izkIr djk;s x;s bill of account /kujkf”k #0 7]08]144-00 ¼la”kksf/kr /kujkf”k #0 6]37]895-00½ dks lEefyr djrs gq;s dqy /kujkf”k #0 21]89]344-00 tek djkus ds uohu “krZ yxknh x;h gSA * foi{kh dh ;g dk;Zokgh tgk¡ ,d vksj ek0 vk;ksx ds vkns”k fnukad 10-09-2014 dh voekuuk gS ogha nwljh vksj ifjokfnuh ds fo#) mRihM+kukRed dk;Zokgh dk Hkh | ksrd gSA ek0 vk;ksx ds vkns”kks dh vogsyuk@voekuuk ij fopkj Qksje ds {ks=kf/kdkj esa ugha vkrk gS ,oa bl ds fy, ifjokfnuh }kjk ek0 vk;ksx ds le{k izR;kosnu izLrqr fd;k tk pqdk gS ftl ij ek0 vk;ksx vius Lrj ls dk;Zokgh gsrq l{ke gSA

¼;½ fu’d’kZ @lalqfr * mijksDr dqN fcUnqvksa ds vkyksd esa ;g Li’V gS fd ifjokfnuh dks fofHkUu le;kof/k esa Hksts x;s fcyksa vkfn ds fy, foi{kh Lrj ls tkucw> dj mRihM+ukRed dk;Zokgh dh x;h gSA fo|qr vf/kfu;e 2003 dh /kkjk 142 ds vUrxZr foi{kh ds fo#) fdlh Hkh dk;Zokgh ds fy, Qksje l{ke Lrj ugha gSA vr% Qksje Lrj ls ek0 vk;ksx dks lalqfr dh tkrh gS fd foi{kh ds fo#) /kkjk 142 ds vUrxZr vko”;d dk;Zokgh djus dh Ñik djsa rFkk eq[; vfHk;Urk forj.k vyhx<+ {ks= vyhx<+ dks Hkh fo|qr forj.k [k.M dklxat esa ifjokfnuh ds la;kstu fujxeu frfFk ¼08@2008½ls Qksje esa ifjokn iathdj.k frfFk 09-10-2014 rd rSukr jgsa os lHkh Page 5 of 23 vf/kdkjh@dkfeZd tks ifjokfnuh ifjlj dks lqpk# fo|qr vkiwfrZ] ehVj LFkkiuk ,oa j[k j[kko] ehVj jhfMax vadu] fcy fujxeu ,oa jktLo olwy;koh vkfn ds fy, mRrjnk;h jgsa gS ds fo#) vko”;d vuq”kklukRed dk;Zokgh lafFkr djus gsrq vknsf”kr djus dh Ñik djsa ftlls fo|qr forj.k [k.M dklxat ds leLr vU; miHkksDrkvksa ¼ifjokfnuh lfgr½ dk mRihM+u u gks ldsa D;ksafd foi{kh } kjk ifjokfnuh ds fo#) ek0 mPp U;k;ky; esa ;ksftr okn ds vfrfjDr Qksje esa iathÑrifjokn la0& 384@2013@Kasg.,385@2013@Kasg] 357@2013@Kasg] 377@2013@Kasg esa Qksje }kjk ikfjr fu.kZ;@vkns”k ds fo#) ek0 mPp U;k;ky; bykgkckn esa W/P No- 61368] 61257]61317 ,oa 61254 of 2003 ;ksftr djnh x;h vFkkZr miHkksDrkvksa dh leL;k dk lek/kku djus dh vis{kk foi{kh }kjk miHkksDrkvksa dks dkuwuh izfdz;k esa my>kusa ,oa ekufld mRihM+u dk iz;kl fd;k x;k gSA Qksje dh jk; esa ek0 vk;ksx }kjk Qksje dks fjek.M fd;s x;s fopkj.kh; fcUnq A ,oa B ij Qksje dh foospuk ,oa fu’d’kZ@vkns”k ds vuqlkj Lohdkj fd;s tkus ;ksX; gS ,oa Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gSA**

From the above reading of CGRF order dated 3.11.2014 and as also from chain of events in this case including Hon’ble High Court’s order dated 28.4.2014 it is very clear that the respondent Executive Engineer is in the habit of disobeying the superior orders and delaying the implementation of the Commission’s orders by whatsoever means. The Commission had clearly directed on 10.09.2014 as follows:“The Commission directed the respondents to restore the connection within five days of deposit of 50 % of the bill amount as per the amended bill handed over to the petitioner during the last hearing”.Obviously this was not complied with and no explanation for the same was submitted to this Commission. This conduct of the Executive Engineer becomes unpardonable in view of the fact that the Commission had earlier accepted his apology on 7.8.2014. The apology, it seems, was given by him only to save himself from unhappiness of the Commission and the Executive Engineer Sri Singh immediately went back to his old habits of harassing the innocent consumer. The penalty of Rs. 50,000/- is imposed on Shri Parasuram Singh, Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division, Kasganj, on

of 23 the account of not complying Commission’s order dated 10.9.2014,this penalty shall be deducted from his salary and entry of the same shall be made in his personal records. This penalty shall be deposited in the Commission. The observation of CGRF against the Executive Engineer in its decision dated 3.11.2014 will have to be dealt with separately which shall be taken up in the next hearing.

Shri Parasuram Singh, Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division, Kasganj (Appellant) has challenged and made an appeal in Hon’ble APTEL against the judgment and order dated 08/01/2015 passed by the State Commission.

Hon’ble APTEL observed that they have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case of the Appellant and M/s Greenland Fruit and Vegetables Pvt. Limited. (Respondent) as regards the alleged inflated bills and related issues and said if such issues are raised they shall be dealt with by the State Commission independently and in accordance with law.But Hon’ble APTEL did not interfere with the order of the Commission regarding imposition of penalty of Rs 50,000.

During hearing on 07.09.2016 the Petitioner stated that the bill is defective and if the same is rectified she will deposit the bill amount.

Shri A. S. Rakhra, Advocate,prayed before the Commission to reduce the penalty of Rs.50, 000/- onthe Respondentimposed by the Commission through its order dated 08/01/2015 on the account of not complying Commission’s order dated 10.9.2014 with the request that such huge penalty would badly affect the career of the Respondent.

The Commission is of view that the penalty of Rs 5000 has been imposed on the Executive Engineer,Kaganj in view of the conduct of Respondent of harassing the innocent consumer. It was also directed that the Respondent should amend the bill of the Petitioner in the light of observation and comments made by CGRF through CGRF order dated 03.11.2014 and if it is found that the observation and comments of CGRF dated 03.11.2014 arenotcomplied, it would be a disrespect to both CGRF and State Commission.

of 23 Shri R. P. Singh Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division, Kasganj requested the Commission to remand the matter to CGRF to check whether the bill have been prepared in accordance to its observation .The Commission allowed it but said that if the bill is not found in accordance with CGRF observation then the penalty imposed on Shri Parasuram Singh, the then Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division, Kasganj would be further increased.

The Commission further while passing the order raised following issues: a)Whether the bill has been prepared in accordance to the CGRF order dated 28.09.2013&03.11.2014. b) Whether the Consumer can be charged for the consumption shown by the meter during the disconnected period. If Yes, then under what Regulation &Provision. c) When after disconnection the meter was removed why an opportunity was not given to the Petitioner to be present at the time of meter removal and the MRI of the meter. d) What action can be initiated against the Respondent?

This report should be submitted by CGRF within 15 days of issue of this order after listening to both the parties.

During the hearing on 16.01.2017, the Commission finds that the CGRF has submitted its report vide letter no. 311/CGRF(Aligarh) dated 24.12.2016 and the point wise report is as follows: ek0 fo|qr fu;ked vk;ksx ds fo|qr v/khfu;e dh /kkjk 142 ds vUrxZr okn M/S Greenland fruits & vegetable Pvt. Lmt. C/O Dr. Shashilata Chauhan(M.D, Mohanpura Kasganj, Dist, Kasiramnagar,Versus Shri P.R. Singh Executive Engineer, Electicity distribustion division, Kasganj esa bl Qksje ds okn la0& 372@2013@dklxat esa ikfjr vkns’k fnukad 28-09-13 ,oa blh ls lEcfU/kr okn la0& 643@2014@ dklxat esa ikfjr vksn’k fnukad 03-11-14ds vuqikyu ds lEcU/k esa ek0 fo| qr fu;ked vk;ksx ds vkns’k fnukad 13-10-16 dh izfr izkIr gqvk ftlds } kjk fuEu 4 fcUnqvksa ij mHk; i{kksa dh lquokbZ dj bl Qksje ls vk[;k dh vis{kk dh x;h gS%& a) Whether the bill has been prepared in accordance to the CGRF order dated 28.092013 & 03.11.2014.

of 23 b) Whether the Consumer can be charged for the consumption shown by the meter during the disconnected period. If yes, then under what Regulation & Provision. c) When after disconnection the meter was removed why an opportunity was not given to the Petitioner to be present at the time of meter removal and the MRI of the meter. d) What action can be initiated against the Respondent?

vkns'k izkfIr ds ckn ifjoknhM/S Greenland fruits & vegetable Pvt. Lmt. C/O Dr.

Shashilata Chauhan(M.D, Mohanpura Kasganj, Dist, Kasiramnagar,foi{khShri P.R. Singh the than Executive Engineer, Electicity distribustion division, Kasganj ¼At present Suprenteding

engeneer Etawh),oa vf/k’kklh vfHk;Urk fo|qr forj.k [k.M dklaxt dks uksfVl fn;k x;kA rRi’pkr~ ifjoknh vkSj lHkh foi{kh x.k Qksje esa mifLFkr gq, rFkk viuh rjQ ls fyf[kr dFku dqN dkxtkrksa ds lkFk nkf[ky fd;kA Qksje } kjk mHk;i{kksa dks lquk x;k rFkk mudh rjQ ls nkf[ky dkxtkrksa dk

voyksdu fd;k x;kA mijksDr 4 fcUnqvksa esa ls fcUnq (b) ij lnL; rduhdh dj.k flag dk eUrO; dqN fHkUu gS o mudh vk[;k vyx ls layXu gSA ijUrq mijksDr 4 fcUnqvksa ij vo/ks’k eYy v/;{k@lnL; U;kf;d ,oa ts0ih oekZ lnL; ykbZlsUlh dk eUrC; ,d gS rFkk nksuksa lnL;ksa ds cgqer ls ;g Qksje dk eUrO; gS] rFkk mijksDr 4 fcUnqvksa ij Qksje dh vk[;k fuEu gS%& fcUnq (a)“Weather the bill has been Prepared in accordance to the CGRF orders dated 28.09.13 o 03.11.14” (i) ifjoknh ds ewy okn la0&372@[email protected] Qksje us fnukad 28- 09-13 dks fuEuor~ fu.kZ; fn;k%& “ 1 ifjokfnuh ds la;kstu fuxZeu ds le; ls gh jgh oksYVst dh leL;k dk fopkj.k Qksje Lrj ij dkyckf/kr gksus ds dkj.k fopkj.kha; ugh gSA 2- foi{kh }kjk izsf”kr izksfotuy jktLo fu/kkZj.k fujLr fd;k tkrk gS] ,oa foi{kh dks vknsf’kr fd;k tkrk gS fd fnukad 31-07-2011@26-08-2011 dks miHkksDrk ehVj esa vafdr ehVj jhfMax ds vk/kkj ij ifjokfnuh dks ‘kq) ns;d ifjokfnuh }kjk tek djk;h x;h /kujkf’k dks le;ksftr djrs gq;s 15 fnu ds vUnj Hkqxrku gsrq miyC/k djkosaA

of 23 3- foi{kh }kjk ftykf/kdkjh dklxat dks ifjokfnuh ds fo:) /kkjk& 5 ds vUrxZr Áksohtuy jktLo fu/kkZj.k ds vk/kkj ij fuxZr fMekUM uksfVl fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA

foi{kh us le; ls fu.kZ; dk ikyu u dj ek0 U;k;ky; bykgkckn esa okn la0& 61372 ;ksftr fd;kA ifjoknh us Qksje ds fu.kZ; fnukad 28-09-2013 dk ikyu

djkus gsrq ek0 fo|qr fu;ked vk;ksx ds le{k /kkjk 142@Act 2003 ds rgr vfHkekuuk ;kfpdk ;ksftr dh rc Jh ih0vkj0 flag vf/k’kklh vfHk;Urk fo|qr forj.k dklxat us vius i=kad 378 fnukad 02-06-2014 }kjk fnukad 31-07- 11 rd dk :0 708144-00 dk fcy izsf”krfd;k ftlds mijkURk ek0 fo|qr fu;ked vk;ksx us fnukad 10-09-14 dks vfHkekuuk ;kfpdk dk fuLrkj.k djrs gq;s fuEuor~ vkns’k fd;kA

“ The case is remanded back to CGRF, Aligarh and the petitionr may approach CGRF, Aligarh regarding the bill amount. The Pleadings may be made afresh regarding the bill The CGRF, Aligarh shall decide the case within ten days and the petitioner will deposit the amended bill amount in next five days and in this case, the respondent shall reconnect the supply within next twenty four hours thereafter. Although the Commission has accepted the unconditional apology of the Executive Engineer however his conduct shall be looked into by CGRF while examining the bills submitted by him and if there has been a deliberate effort to harass the petitioner, the CGRF may take punitive action. The Commission makes it clear that CGRF may take independent view for penalty, if any.” ¼ii½ ek0 fu;ked vk;ksx ds vkns’k ds Øe esa ifjokn la0& 643@2014 ds :i esa okn iathd`r dj nksukas i{kksa dh lquokbZ ds mijkUr fuEuor~ vkns’k fn;k %&

^^ifjokn la0&643@2014@kasg. fopkj.kh; fcUnq A ,oa Bij Qksje dh foospuk ,oa fu”d”kZ@vkns’k ds vuqlkj Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gS rFkk foi{kh dks vknsf’kr fd;k tkrk gS fd fopkj.kh; fcUnq la0& A ¼ifjokn

of 23 fcUnq 1 ls 10½ ij Qksje ds fu”d”kZ@vkns’k dk vuqikyu dj ek0 vk;ksx ds le{k fnukad 04-06-2014 dks izLrqr bill of account esa la’kks/ku dj ifjokfnuh dks lafgrk 2005 ds DykWt 6.5(b) ds vuqlkj 10 fnu ds vUnj fcy izsf”kr djuk lqfuf’pr djsaA vkns'k dh izfr ek0 vk;ksx dks Hkh izsf”kr dh tk;sA **

Qksje ds mDr vkns’kds vuqikyu esa foi{kh us vius i=kad 6867 fnukad 11-11-14 layXud ¼1½ dk mYys[k fd;k gS] ijUrq ifjoknh us vius i=kad ‘kwU; fnukad 19-11-14 layXud ¼2½ dk mYys[k djrs gq, foi{kh }kjk Qksje ds vkns’k dk iw.kZ ikyu uk djus dk mYys[k fd;k gS ftlds fooj.k ls fuEuor~ /kujkf’k miHkksDrk ds fo#) ‘ks”k gksuh pkfg,%&

Ø0la fooj.k /kjkf’k fVIi.kh 0 1 izfrHkwfr jkf’k ij vfrfjDr 32838 lek;kstu gks pqdk gS C;kt 2 foyEc vf/kHkkj dh ekax 92093 fu.kZ; fnukad 28-03-13 ds vuqlkj ykxw ugha 3 OTS ;kstuk esa iathdj.k 1000 la;kstu fd;k tkuk ‘ks”k gS jkf’k 4 fnukad 23-09-14 dks tek 354072 lek;kstu gks pqdk gS 5 foi{kh }kjk fn;k x;k fcy 434213 Ifjoknh dks #0 708144 ds LFkku ij ;g la’kksf/kr fcy fn;k gSA 6 miHkksDrk ds fo#) ‘ks”k (-)4579 lek;kstu fd;k tkuk ‘ks”k gS cdk;k 0

Qksje dh jk; Qksje ds vkns’k fnukad 28-09-2013 ds lUnHkZ esa foi{kh us igys :0 7]08]144-00 dk fcy ifjoknh }kjk izLrqr voekuuk ;kfpdk fo|qr vf/kfu;e 2003 dh /kkjk 142 ds lUnHkZ esa ek0 vk;ksx ds le{k dk izsf”kr fd;kA ek0 vk;ksx } kjk Qksje dks dsl iqu% izsf”kr fd;s tkus ds ifjis{; esa Qksje ds fuxZr fu.kZ; Page 11 of 23 fnukad 03-11-14 ds vuqikyu esa foi{kh us #0 434213-00 izsf”kr dj Qksje ds fu.kZ; dk vkaf’kd ikyu fd;k vFkkZr Qksje ds fu.kZ; fnukad 28-09-13 o fnukad 03-11-14 ds vuqlkj ifjoknh dks ehVj dh okLrfod [kir ds vk/kkj ij fnukad 31- 08-11@26-08-11 rd dk ‘kq) ns;d ¼fcuk C;kt½ nsuk pkfg, FkkA iz'u ¼B) “Whether the Consumer can be charged for the consumption shown by the meter during the disconnected period. If yes, then under what Regulation & Provision. iz'uxr~ izdj.k esa miHkksDrk dk la;kstu fnukad 31-07-2011 dks

dkVs tkus ls ysdj PDCij fnukad 31-01-2013 dks ehVj la0 80391 dks mrkjs tkus o fuekZrk QeZ eS0 flD;ksj }kjk Hksth vk[;k fnuakd 16-02-2013

¼layXud& 3½ rFkk iz’uxr~ ehVj dh MRI ¼ftlds izR;sd i`”B ij fnuakd 18-03- 2013 vafdr gS½ ls fuEukafdr rF; laKku esa vk;s gSaA ¼layXud& 4½

¼1½ miHkksDrk ds ifjlj ij esu ehVj la0&UP080391,LFkkfir FkkA foi{kh us fnukad 31-07-2011 dks cdk;s ij la;kstu dkVus ds ckn vkt fnukad 26-08-2011 dks Hkh mDr nksuksa ehVjksa dh jhfMax yh vkSj ml oDr la;kstu dVk gqvk FkkA mlds ckn fnukad 31-01-2013 dks ih-Mh-lh gsrq ehVj mrkjus ls iwoZ xksiuh; tk¡p Hkh dh x;h ftlesa la;kstu foPNsfnr ik;k x;k Fkk ¼ijUrq dksbZ

pSfdax fjiksZV foi{kh uss miyC/k ugha djk;h½ mDr nksuksa ehVj No

display Hkh ik;s x;sA foHkkxh; fu;eksa ds vuqlkj 125KVAHkkj dh ekfld jhfMax ysus dk mRrjnkf;Ro lEcfU/kr lgk;d vfHk;Urk ¼ehVlZ½ ,oa mi[k.M vf/kdkjh dk Fkk ftlds vk/kkj ij la;kstu dk ekfld fcy fuxZr gksrk] ijUrq i=koyh ij miyC/k lk{;ksa] cgl ds vuqlkj fnukad 26-08-2011 ds mijkUr ls fnukad 31- 01-2013 rd iz’uxr~ la;kstu ds ehVj dh deh Hkh ekfld ¼fu;fer½ jhfMax ugha yh x;hA fnukad 31-01-2013 dks Nkikekjh dk;Zokgh ds mijkUr pSfdax fjiksZV Hkh ugha Hkjh x;h vkSj uk gh dksbZ vU; fof/kd dk;Zokgh tSls

135 ;k 138 Bdh A

of 23 ¼2½ ifjoknh us vius fyf[kr c;ku ds lkFk okn la0 643 dk;Zokgh ds nkSjku lgk;d vfHk;Urk¼ehVlZ½ dklxat ds fn;s c;ku fnukad 20-10-14 ¼layXud& 4½ dk mYys[k fd;k gS ftlesa Qksje us fuEukafdr iz’u iwNs FksA ^^ iz’u&¼1½ fnukad 01-08-2011 ls 16-02-2013 rd la;kstu dh ekfld jhfMaxD;ksa ugha yh x;h? ^^ egksn; bl lEcU/k esa ;g voxr~ djkuk gS fd miHkksDrk dk la;kstu cdk;s ij fnukad 31-07-2011 dks rRdkyhu mi[k.M vf/kdkjh }kjk dkVk x;k FkkA esjs }kjkA.E (M)dh gSfl;r ls Reading power back}kjk 26- 08-2011 dks yh x;h FkhA dklxat dk vfrfjDr dk;ZHkkj fnukad 09-12- 2011 ls 15-05-2012 rd ek= ¼5ekg½ dk gh jgkA fnukad 15-05-12 ls 16-12-13 ls Jh vjfoUn dqjhy] mi[k.M vf/kdkjh ¼izFke½] dklxat ij rSukr FksA cdk;s ij izfrekg Reading blfy, ugha yh x;h fd D;ksafd miHkksDrk ij cdk;k FkkvkSj Line dVh gqbZ FkhA Power Pack}kjk Reading flQZ ml fLFkfr esa yh trh gS tcfd miHkksDrk dk ekfld fcy cukuk gksrk gSA fdUrq Divisiovdk;kZy; }kjk eq>s Reading djus gsrq dksbZ fyf[kr vkns’k ugha fn;s x;s] bl otg ls cdk;k ij Connection (26.08.2011)dVus ds ckn Reading ugha dh xbZA iz’u&¼2½ miHkksDrk }kjk vukf/kÑr fo|qr [kir djus ds fo#) FIR

D;ksa ugha dh x;h ? ds iz’u dk fuEuor~ mUgksaus mRrj fn;k

^^ bl lEcU/k esa ;g dguk gS fd fnukad 31-01-2013 dk jkf= esa la;qDr Nkikekj dk;Zokgh ds nkSjku mijksdr Connectionpyrk gqvk ugha ik;k x;k FkkA ml oDr SDO- I,dk dk;ZHkkj Jh vjfoUn dqjhy ds ikl FkkA A.E (M)dh gSfl;r ls Meter temper gksus ij gh FIR djk ldrk FkkA fdUrq Meterdh lHkh lhy lqjf{kr ik;h x;h tSlk fd flD;ksj dEiuh } kjk Hksth xbZ Reportesa Hkh Li”V gS vr% FIR djkus dk dksbZ vksfpR; ugha curk FkkA **

mijksDr C;ku ls vukf/kÑr Nkikekj dk;Zokgh ds mijkUr pSfdax fjiksZV Hkjs tkus o /kkjk 135 ;k 138 B esa FIR;k /kkjk 126 esa dk;Zokgh fd;s tkus dk mYys[k ugha gSSA

of 23 ¼3½ mijksDr nksuksa iz’uksa dk lEcfU/kr voj vfHk;Urk us Qksje dks fuXuor~ c;ku fn;k ¼layXud& 6½

^^i)mDr la;kstu 125 ds0oh0,0 dk gS fuxe fu;ekuqlkj bl la;kstu dh jhfMax ysuk voj vfHk;URkk dk Js.kh esa ugha vkrk tks mi[k.M vf/kdkjh ,oa lgk;d vfHk;Urk ehVj ds dk;Z Js.kh esa vkrk gSA

ii) eSaus fnukad 03-08-2012 dks fo0fo0[k.M dklxat esa dk;ZHkkj xzg.k fd;k Fkk vkSj mlds mijkUr esa voj vfHk;URkk ¼izf’k{kq½ ds :i esa dk;Z dj jgk Fkk eq>s voxr~ ughs djk;k x;k Fkk fd ;g la;kstu cdk;k ij dVk gqvk gS vkSj eq>s bl la;kstu dk ekfld fcy Hkh gLrxr ugha djk;k x;k FkkA ftlls eq>s ;g Kkr gksrk gS fd ;g la;kstu cdk;k ij dVk gS ;k py jgk gS vkSj bl la;kstu ds ÅtkZ ehVj dks tc mrkjk x;k rc Hkh eq>s lwwpuk ugha nh x;hA vr% eSa bl izdj.k ls iw.kZ :i ls vukfHkK FkkA**

vFkkZr mDr la;kstu ds ehVj dks mrkjrs le; lEcfU/kr voj vfHk;Urk dks Hkh lwpuk ugha FkhA ¼4½ Jh ih-vkj- flag foi{kh la0 1 ,oa 2 ds i= la0& 1012 fnukad 15-02-13 ¼layXud& 7½ ds }kjk vf/k’kklh vfHk;Urk fo|qr ijh{k.k [k.M ,Vk] dks ehVj mrkjs tkus ds lEcU/k esa fuEuor~ lwfpr fd;k

^^ vkidks voxr~ djkuk gS fd fnukad 31-01-2013 dks ,l0Mh0vks0 dklxat] rFkk lgk;d vfHk;Urk ¼ehVj½ dklxat }kjk mijksDr miHkksDrk dk Main MeterrFkk iksy Mnuted Metermrkj dj lhy fd;k x;k FkkA miHkksDrk us vius i=kad ‘kwU; fnukad 13-02-13 ds voxr~ djk;k gS fd gekjs ehVj [kqys iMs+ gSa ftlls foHkkx dh lafnX/krk izrhr gksrh gS tcfd mDr nksuksa ehVj mi[k.M vf/kdkjh izFke] dklxat dh mifLFkfr esa lhy fd;s x;s FksA vr% vkils vuqjks/k gS fd vki vius Lrj ls ;g lqfuf’pr djas fd miHkksDRkk ds dFkukuqlkj lhy ehVj D;ksa [kksyk x;k gS vxj miHkksDrk ds lkeus ehVj [kksyk x;k gS rks mldh pSfdax fjiksZV o MRIdh izfrfrfi [k.M dk;kZy; dks izsf”kr djsa vxj fdlh dkj.k ol ehVj dh MRI o pSfdax miHkksDrk ds le{k u gks ik;h rks mls iqu% miHkksDrk ds le{k jh lkhy D;ksa ugha fd;k x;k ftlls lgk;d vfHk;URkk ¼ehVj½ dh dk;Ziz.kkyh lafnX/k izrhr gksrh gS bl izdj.k vius Lrj ls tkap dj viuh vk[;k [k.M dk;kZy; esa nsuk lqfuf’pr djsa rkfd miHkksDrk ds vkosnu dk fuLrkj.k fd;k tk ldsA **

of 23 vFkkZr mijksDr ls Li”V gS fd ifjoknh us vius i=kad fnukad 13- 02-2013 }kjk lhy ehVj [kqys gksus] miHkksDrk ds le{k MRI gksus vkfn ls foi{kh dks lle; voxr~ djk fn;k Fkk ijUrq mlds ckn Hkh ehVj iqu% lhy djus] ehVj dh tk¡p djus vkfn ds lEcU/k esa mls dksbZ lwpuk ugha nh x;h gS tcfd fo|qr vkiwfrZ lafgrk 2005 ds izLrj 5-6¼x½ ds vuqlkj foi{kh dks fuEuor~ dk;Zokgh djuh pkfg, FkhA “ 5.6(c)(iii) If the consumer disputes the results of testing, or testing at consumer’s premises is difficult, the defective meter shall be replaced by a new tested meter by the Licensee, and, the defective meter after sealing in presence of consumer, shall be tested at licensee’s lab/Independent lab /Electrical Inspector, as agreed by consumer. The option once exercised by consumer shall not be changed. The decision on the basis of reports of the test lab shall be final and binding on the Licensee as well as the consumer. ”

¼5½ foi{kh us iz’uxr~ ehVj la0&UP080391dks 31-01-2013 PDCgsrq mrkjk ftlds mrkjs tkus dk fooj.k ehVj lhfyax izek.k i= la0&17@2014 ij vafdr gS ¼layXu& 8½ ftlds voyksdu ls fuEukafdr rF; izdk’k esa vk;s gSaA

(a)mDr lhfyax izek.k i= ij ehVj mrkjs tkus dh frfFk 31-01-2013@ 18- 02-13 vafdr gS tcfd foi{kh ds vuqlkj ehVj fnukad 31-01-2013 dks mrkjk x;k rks lhfyax izek.k i= ij fnuakd 18-02-2013 vafdr fd;s tkus dk vkSfpR; D;k FkkA

¼b½ mDr lhfyax izek.k i= ds vuqlkj ehVj No displaygksus ds dkj.k ehVj fuekZrk QeZ dks Hkstk x;k ftldh vk[;k ds vuqlkj ehVj

jhfMax 170986 n’kkZ;h gSA mDr Reportij fuEukafdr fVIi.kh Hkh vafdr gSA¼layXu& 3½

“ This is in refrence to the above subject matter, we would like to inform you that one no. meter given to us by hand in no display condition having Sl no. (UP080391) was analayzed and observations are mentioned below:- 1. Manufacturer seals provided on meter body found intact. 2. Ultrasonic welding strips tound itect. 3. Meter was no display and no communication with MRI. 4. Meter became no display due to external high surge voltage. Page 15 of 23 5. Last meter reading of this meter is.c

Sl.No. and KWH (I) KVArH Lg KVArH Ld KVAH 109877 101295 1047 170986

This meter reading back to your office as it is. Kindly acknowledge the same. Thanking you and assuring you of our service and best attention always.”

vFkkZr iz’uxr~ ehVj dh MRIQeZ us bl fjiksZV ds lkFk ugha nh o ehVj foi{kh dks okfil Hkst fn;kA ¼c½ fuekZrk QeZ dh vk[;k ds vuqlkj ehVj “No Communication with MRI”Fkk ftlds vuqlkj iz’uxr~ ehVj dh MRIugha dh tk ldrh Fkh ,oa fuekZrk QeZ us Meter No displaydk dkj.k Hkh “Meter become No display due to External High Surge Voltage”n’kkZ;k gSA vFkkZr~ mDr jhfMax ds leFkZu esa fnukad 16-02-2013 dks MRI miyC/k ugha Fkh rks foi{kh }kjk izLrqr MRI ¼ftlds izR;sd i`”B ij fnukad18-03-13 vafdr gS½¼layXu& 4½ dk vkSfpR; izekf.kr ugha gksrk gSA ¼d½ QeZ }kjk ehVj iqu% lgk;d vfHk;Urk ehVj dks Hkstk tkuk n’kkZ;k gS“The Meter sending back to you office as it is Kindly acknowledge the same”ijUrq lhfyax izek.k i= ij foHkkxh; vf/kdkfj;ksa dh fVIi.kh esa vafdr fd;k x;k gS fd “ fMVsy MkVk ds fy, ehVj iqu% flD;ksj y[kuÅ }kjk vius eq[;ky; mn;iqj Hkstk x;k gS ”tks fd fuekZrk QeZ eS0 flD;ksj y[kuÅ dk;kZy; }kjk izsf”kr Reportfnukad 16-02-2013 ds fojks/kkHkk”kh gSA ¼layXu& 4½

¼e½ “No Communication with MRI”rks fQj ;g MRI¼ftlds izR;sd i`”B ij fnukad 18-03-13 vafdr gS½ dc vkSj dSls izkIr gq;h] vkfn dk mYys[k foi{kh us iz’uxr~ Qksje es ;ksftr okn la0&372@2013] 643@2014] o vkt rd dHkh ugha fd;kA ehVj dh tk¡p] MRI vk[;k ij foi{kh dk iz’u fpUg LokHkkfod gS pw¡fd mldk la;kstu fnukad 31- 07-2011 dks dkVk x;k ,oa fnukad 31-01-2013 dks mldh vuqifLFkrh esa fcuk lwpuk fn;s Nkikekj dk;Zokgh dj ehVj mrkjk x;k ;gk¡ rd fd mldks ehVj dh tk¡p fd;s tkus dh lwpuk Hkh ugha nh

of 23 o ehVj tk¡p fd;s tkus gsrq lgefr dk iz;kl Hkh ugha fd;kA miHkksDrk }kjk vukf/kd`r fo|qr miHkksx fd;s tkus dh dksbZ pSfdax fjiksZV ugha Hkjh x;h vkSj uk gh fo|qr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 135 ;k 138 esa lle; dk;Zokgh dh x;hA ¼f½ mDr lhfyax izek.k i= ij miHkksDrk ij miHkksDrk vFkok mlds izfrfuf/k ds gLrk{kj Hkh ugha gS] gLrk{kj uk djus dk dkj.k Hkh vafdr ugha gS ;gk¡ rd fd ehVj lhfyax izek.k i= ij 31-01-2013@18-02-2013 ¼layXu& 8½ vafdr gksus ls Li”V gS fd ;g izek.k i= ehVj mrkjus dh fnukad 31-01-2013 dks ugha Hkjk x;k vfir fuekZrk QeZ ls fnukad 16-02-2013 dks vk[;k izkIr gksus ds mijkUr fnukad 18-02-2013 dks Hkjk x;k gS tks fo|qr vkiwfrZ lafgrk 2005 o miHkksDrk ds iznRr vf/kdkjksa ds foijhr gSA ftlls miHkksDrk dh vlgefr mfpr izrhr gksrh gSA ¼6½ Jh ih-vkj- flag us vius i=kad 3518 fnukad 27-09-12 }kjk mi[k.M vf/kdkjh] izFke] dks ih-Mh-lh- vk[;k gsrq i= Hkstk ¼layXu&9 ½ ftlesa ifjoknh dk la;kstu ekg 06@11 esa cdk;k 734000- 00 ij n’kkZ;k gS rFkk 6 ekg dh le; lhek O;rhr gksus ij ih-Mh-lh vk[;k Hksts tkus gsrq funsZf’kr fd;k fo|qr vkiwfrZ lafgrk 2005 ds izLrj 4-37 ds vuqlkj dVs gq, la;kstu ds lEcU/k esa fUkEukafdr izkfo/kku gSa

“ (a) The Licensee shall, after a connection is temporarily disconnected, bill a consumer on minimum charges, and also issue a notice, as per format given in Annexure 4.9, to the consumer, to remove the cause of disconnection failing which, the supply shall be disconnected permanently after six months. Such connections shall be treated as dormant connections (awaiting final account), and the billing shall be stopped after carrying out inspections and duly informing the consumer, and final account of the consumer shall be prepared. (b) Wherever licensee discovers that connection has been re- connected unauthorisedly after temporary disconnection, licensee may initiate action as per provisions of Section 138 of the Act.”

of 23 ftldk ikyu lle; foi{kh us ugha fd;k cfYd ek= Paperfy[k dj bfrJh dj yh x;hA ftlls fuxe o miHkksDrk nksuksa ds fgr izHkkfor gq,A ¼7½ ifjoknh us okn la0&372@2013] esa fnukad fn;s fyf[kr dFku ds fcUnq 24 esa ek0 mPp U;k;ky; esa ;kfpdk la0&52054@2010] esa ebZu jkbl fey cuke e/;kapy fo|qr forj.k fuxe fy0 fu.kZ; fnukad 19-10-2011 dk mYys[k fd;k tks fuEuor~ gS¼layXu&10 ½ “ No Person can be made an arbiter of a dispute when such person has its own interest in the matter. When there is a dispute regarding the meter whether it is correct or not, whether tampered or not, meter manufacturing company having its own interest in the meter, if allowed to adjudicateand that too conclusively on the question of tampering ot temper etc.that would amount to inviting a decision from a person having large commercial interest in the matter. It would hit the principal that no one shall be judge in his own cause. Even outherwise when the statute talks of an” independent testing laboratory” it does not mean that it should be a test lab of the person holding large commercial interest in the matter. Moreover, aprivate company,s opinion cannot be given statutory status in absence of any provision to do so. ”

ftlds vk/kkj ij iz’uxr~ ehVj dh miHkksDrk dk fcuk lwpuk o mldh lgefr ds fuekZrk QeZ ls djk;h tkap ds vuqlkj fcy fy;k tkuk lqlaxr ugha gS ,oa uSlfxZd U;k; ds ewy fl)kUr ds foijhr Hkh gSA Qksje dh jk; miHkksDrk dk la;kstu fnukad 31-07-2011 ls fnukad 31-01-2013 rd dVk jgk tks ek0 vk;ksx ds vkns’k }kjk dks tksMk+ x;kA mDr vof/k esa foi{kh us

iz’uxr~ Meterdks miHkksDrk dks lwpuk fn;s fcuk mrkjk] ehVj dh tkap gsrq

miHkksDRkk ls lgefr ugha yh x;h] iz'uxr~ ehVj dh jhfM+x ,oa MRIij

miHkksDrk dks vkifRr] mijksDRk fcUnq 1 ls 7 rd iz’uxr~ Metero MRIds fo”ys’k.k dks n`f”Vxr j[krs fuEukafdr fo|eku fu;e o dkj.kkas ls miHkksDrk ls fcy ugha fy;k tk ldrk D;ksafd %& ¼1½ fo|qr vkiwfrZ lafgrk 05 ds izLrj 5-6¼x½ dk foi{kh }kjk mYya? ku fd;k tkuk] miHkksDrk ds ehVj dks mrkjrs le; lwfpr uk djuk] ehVj dh tkap gsrq lgefr izkIr uk djuk izekf.kr gSA

of 23 ¼2½ foi{kh us fnukad 31-01-2013 dks ;fn vukf/kd`r fo|qr mi;ksx ik;k Fkk rks ml le; pSfdax fjiksZV fo|qr vkiwfrZ lafgrk 2005 ds layXud 6-4 ds vuqlkj ugha Hkjh x;h ,oa vukf/kÑr fo|qr miHkksx gsrq fo|qr vf/kfu;e 2003

ds izLrj 135@138 (b)ds vuq:i o fo|qr vkiwfrZ lafgrk 05 ds izLrj 6-9] 8-1] 8-2 ds vuqlkj dk;Zokgh Hkh ugha dh x;hA

¼3½“No body can be justice of his own cause ”ds vuqlkj ehVj fuekZrk QeZ ls gh tkap djuk vkSj og Hkh miHkksDrk dh lgefr ds fo:) djk;k tkuk uSlfxZd U;k; ds izekf.kr fl)kUr ds loZ/kk foijhr gSA

fcUnq la0& C “When after disconnection the meter was removed why an apportunity Was not given Petitiones to be present at the time of meter remove and the MRI

of mete”foi{kh }kjk ehVj la0&UPO80391,fnukad 31-01-2013 dh jkf= esa

PDC gsrq mrkjk x;k tks No displayFkk ftldk mYys[k lhfyax izek.k i= la0&17@14]¼layXud& 8½ ij gS ,oa fnuakd 31-01-2013@18-02-2016 frfFk vafdr gS ftlds voyksdu ls Li”V gS fd eq[; ehVj la0 80391 mrkjrs le; miHkksDrk ds gLrk{kj Hkh lhfyax izek.k ij vafdr ugha gS ,oa gLrk{kj uk djus dk dkj.k vafdr gSA foi{kh fnukad 13-12-16 lquokbZ ds nkSjku rd Hkh ,slk dksbZ vfHkys[k@lk{; Qksje ds le{k izLrqr ugha dj lds ftlls izekf.kr gksrk gks fd miHkksDrk dks mDr vk’; dk volj Hkh iznku fd;k gks ftlls ifjoknh dk O;fFkr gksuk mfpr gSA lquokbZ ds le; foi{kh us

Li”V dgk fd ehVj mrkjus oMRIds le; ifjoknh dks mifLFkr djus dh lwpuk ugha fn;k x;k ijUrq mldk dksbZ dkj.k ugha crk;k x;kA Qksje dh jk; foi{kh us mDr izdj.k dh lquokbZ fnukad 13-12-2016 esa ,sls dksbZ rF; izLrqr ugha fd;s ftlls miHkksDrk ds eq[; ehVj

la0&UPO80391,dks mrkjrs o tkap ds le; mifLFkr jgus gsrq mls lwfpr Hkh fd;k gks tks fo|qr vkiwfrZ lafgrk 05 ds izLrj 5-6¼x½ ds foijhr gS Page 19 of 23 fcUnq la0& D “What action can be taken against the Respondent” mijksDr fcUnqvksa ij d`r dk;Zokgh ds vuqlkj foi{kh us fo|qr vkiwfrZ lafgrk 05 ds izLrj 5-6¼x½ fo|qr vf/kfu;e 03 ds izkfo/kkuksa ds vUrxZr le;d dk;Zokgh ugh dh gSA Qksje ds fu.kZ; fnukad 28-09-2013 ,oa 03-11- 2014 dk Hkh iw.kZ ikyu ugha gqvkA ;|fi foi{kh us dqN dkfeZdksa ds fo:) vuq’kklukRed dk;Zokgh Hkh dh gS ftudk fooj.k bl izdkj gSA ¼1½ Jh ih0vkj0 flag vf/k’kklh vfHk;Ukrk fo0fo0[k0 dklxat] Jh vkj0lh0 vxzoky mi[k.M vf/kdkjh] Jh jktho prqrZsnh vf/k’kklh vfHk;Urk ¼ijh{k.k½ ,Vk] Jh vkj0ih0,l0 rkSej rRdkyhu vf/k’kklh vfHk;Urk o Jh vjfoUn dqekj mi[k.M vf/kdkjh dks psrkouh fuxZr dh x;h gSA ¼2½ Jh ,p0,l0 fln~ndh rRdkyhu lgk;d vfHk;URkk ¼ehVj½ dks fuUnk izfr”B ,oa vlap;h izHkko ls 1 osru o`f) jksdus dk n.M fn;k gSA Qksje dh jk; ds vuqlkj izcU/k funs’kd] n0fo0fo0fu0fy0] vkxjk] us vuq’kklukRed dk;Zokgh dh gS ;|fi /kkjk 142 ds vUrxZr dk;Zokgh fd;s tkus gsrq ek0 fo|qr fu;ked vk;ksx LorU= gSA

The Commission directs the respondent Executive Engineer, to refund the amount of Rs. 45,790/- to the petitioner and submit the compliance of affidavit before 31 st January, 2017. As for as the penalty of Rs. 50,000/- imposed on Shri P. R. Singh the then Executive Engineer, Kasganj and presently posted as Superintending Engineer, Etawah is concerned will remain the same and he is directed to deposit the amount in the Commission before 31st January, 2017.

During the hearing on 31 January, 2017 theRespondent (Executive Engineer) has raised the objection against the report submitted by CGRF, Aligarh vide letter no.311 dated 24.12.16.

After 3 years of trial in the present matter, the Respondent has again raised the issues regarding the merit of the case, which were already submitted by him before and it is astonishing for the Commission that why should have been these issues raised before Page 20 of 23 CGRF at the time of remanding back the case to CGRF by the Commission. As CGRF found no ground, it is very clear that the Respondent is raising frivolous issues as inorder not to comply with the previous orders passed by CGRF.

The Respondent through their written submission has raised the objections primarily referring to the Commission that “Executing Court cannot go beyond decree and it has no jurisdiction to modify a decree.It must execute the decree as it is.” In reply to this the Commission wants to make ample clear that it has not overreached its jurisdiction. The case was remanded back to CGRF by the Commission and intead of obeying the CGRF order & directionsin the report, the respondent is not complying with the orders.

The Commission wants to again reiterate the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court and Hon’bleAPTEL. In the Hon’ble APTEL judgment dated 19 July, 2016 in the present case wherein the Court has observed “that they have not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case of the Appellant and M/s Grrenland Fruit and Vegetable Pvt Limited (Respondent) as regards that alleged inflated bills and related issues and said thatif such issues are raised they shall be dealt with by State Commission independenly and in accordance with law.

Also with respect to the issue of M/s. Greenland Fruit and Vegetables Pvt. Limited(Respondent) that the said unit(food processing unit at Mohanpur, Kasganj, U.P) had to be closed because of the Appellant’s conduct of not restoring the connection, the Appellant’s case is that Respondent is not using electricity inspite of restoration of connection. Hon’ble APTEL said that “We do not want to go into this disputed aspect. The State Commission may deal with this issue if it is raised before it by the parties in the pending proceedings.”

Further Hon’ble APTEL stated that they did not want to interfere with the order of the Commission regarding imposition of penalty of Rs 50,000/”-.

The Writ Petition filed by the Appellant in the Allahabad High Court challenging CGRF’s order dated 28/09/2013 quashing the assessment bill as well as notice under Section 5 of the UP Government Electrical Undertakings (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1958, wherein Page 21 of 23 the Allahabad High Court has passed a detailed order on 28/04/2014 directing the State Commission to deal with all the issues raised by the parties. Also Hon’ble High Court directed the State Commission to record its findings on the highly disputed facts between the parties as the grievance of the Petitioner can be redressesd by the Commission itself, on the basis of record and evidence available before it.

The Commission further wants to bring to light that the Respondent is just wasting the time, by moving from one court to other raising frivolous issues instead of complying the orders passed by the CGRF and the Commission .The Commission once again reiterate that the directions issued by its order dated 27.01.2017 must be complied before the next date of hearing, otherwise the penalty of Rs 1000/- per day shall be imposed upon the Respondent.

The Commission has also excused Shri P. R. Singh (the then Executive Engineer, Kasaganj)from his appearance in the hearings in this matter but his penalty remains the same and is not waived of.

During the hearing on 22.03.2017, the Commission directed Secretary UPERC to write a letter to Managing Director, Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (DVVNL) informing him about the repeated noncompliance of the directions of the CGRF order & ofthe Commission by the concerned Executive Engineer (Respondent) and why not a penalty of Rs 1000/- per day shall be imposed upon the erring Executive Engineer.

Therefore Managing Director, DVVNL is directed to ensure the compliance of the orders passed by the CGRF and the Commission. If the requisite orders are not complied then MD, DVVNL is required to appear in person or through its nominee on the next date of hearing.

Futher MD, DVVNL is also directed to ensure that the penalty of Rs 50,000 imposed upon P.R Singh, the then Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division, Kasganj(presently Superintendent Engineer, Etawah) is deposited in the Commission.

List on 02.05.2017 at 15:00 hrs

of 23 (S.K Agrawal) (Desh Deepak Verma) Member Chairman

Dated: 18.4.2017