Tothe UTTAR PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION

toTHE UTTAR PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION Complaint No.35/2015 Quorum Shri Desh Deepak Verma, Chairman Shri S.K Agarwal, Member In the matter of: Sub: Petition under section 142 of the Electricity Act 2003.

Shri Sanjeev Kumar s/o Late Shri Jagdeesh Prasad, Village- Arabgarh, Tahsheel- Jalesar, District- Etah. Petitioner Verus

Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division (Rural), Aruna Nagar, Etah. Respondent

ORDER ( Hearing on 02-05-2017) The Petitioner has filed an application before the Commission under section 14 of UPERC (Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum & Electricity Ombudsman) Regulation 2007 and whereas the Commission initiates the proceeding in the matter under section 142 for non compliance of Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum order dated 03/10/2015 in appeal no. 685/2015/Etah.

The operative part of the CGRF’s order dated 03/10/2015 is reproduced below:

1- Ikfjoknh dk okn ¼,oa mlls mRiUu okn fcUnq la0&1 ,oa 2½ Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gSA

2- fnukad 14-07-2015 dks LFkkfir fd;s x;s pSd ehVj dh fnukad 18-08-2015 dks

M.R.I. fd;s tkus ij M.R.I. Report esa rqyukRed fooj.k ,oa izfroknh }kjk izLrqr fd;s x;s rF;ksa ls izekf.kr gksrk gS fd la;kstu la[;k 010371 ds ifjlj esa LFkkfir

ehVj la[;k EL 0534 Defective gSA vr% nks’k iw.kZ ehVj la[;k EL 0534 ds vk/kkj ij fuxZr fcy fujLr fd;s tkrs gSaA

of 3 3- pSd ehVj ds vk/kkj ij vafdr fMeka.M ,oa [kir ds vk/kkj ij orZekj ,oa foxr fcyksa dks C;kt jfgr fuxZr fd;k tk; ijUrq ;g fcy iksy ehVj ij yxs ehVj dh [kir

@ fMek.M ls vf/kd uk gks ¼Meter accuracy = 0.5% dh lhek esa½

4- iksy ehVj esu ehVj ,oa pSd ehVj dh M.R.I. dk rqyukRed fooj.k Qksje ds ckj&ckj vkns”k ds ckn Hkh izfroknh us izLrqr ugha fd;k gSA eq[; vfHk;Urk ¼forj.k½ vyhx<+ foHkkx dh Nfo dks [kjkc djus okys miHkksDrk dk vuko”;d “kks’k.k djus esa lg;ksx djus okys nks’kh dkfeZdksa ds fo:) vuq”kklukRed dk;Zokgh djuk pkgsaxs ftlls miHkksDrk o fuxe ds fgr lqjf{kr jg ldsaA fu.kZ; dh izfr eq[; vfHk;Urk ¼forj.k½ vyhx<+ dks izsf’kr dh tk;sA

The Commission issued show cause notice to respondent on 23/11/2016 and directed parties to appear in person before the Commission on 07/12/2016.

On the basis of hearing dated 07/12/2016 the following order has been passed by the Commission:-

The petitioner is absent. The respondent is represented by his counsel Shri A.S. Rakhra, Advocate.

The Commission inquired whether the order of CGRF has been complied or not. The respondent submitted that he has no instructions from the client.

The Commission directs the respondent to comply the order and file the compliance affidavit within 2 weeks. In case the compliance affidavit is not filed the Respondent Executive Engineer shall appear in person in the next hearing.

List on 03-01-2017 at 15:00 hrs.

Hearing on 03/01/2017

The petitioner was absent. The respondent was represented by his counsel Shri A.S. Rakhra.

The respondent submitted the Affidavit of Compliance and as the petitioner is absent the Commission directs the petitioner to submit its objection on the compliance report, if any, before the next date of hearing to the Commission with a copy to the respondent. List on 31/01/2017 at 15:00 hrs.

of 3 Hearing on 31/01/2017

The Petitioner was absent. The Respondent was represented by his counsel Shri A.S. Rakhra.

The Petitioner submitted his objections. The Commission directed the Respondent to look into the objections and redress them. List on 22nd day of March, 2017 at 15:00 hrs.

The petitioner was absent. The respondent was represented by Shri A. S. Rakhra, Advocate.

On the last hearing the Commission had directed the respondent to look into the objections submitted by the petitioner and redress them. Counsel for the respondent requested some more time to submit reply to the objections of the petitioner. The Commission granted the same and ordered to list the case on 2nd May, 2017 at 15:00 hrs.

The petitioner was absent. The respondent was represented by Shri A. S. Rakhra, Advocate.

The Commission inquired the respondent counsel whether the respondent has replied the objections filed by the petitioner. The respondent counsel submitted the reply on the objection filed by the petitioner and further submitted that these objections have been disposed off. Since the objections lack evidence and do not hold any ground therefore no further action is needs.

In view of above the petition is disposed off.

(S.K. Agarwal) (Desh Deepak Verma) Member Chairman Dated: 09.05.2017