Order Sheet dated 04/07/2017

In Appeal No. 140/2015

Prof. K.P. Gupta, G-2, Block – III, Express Garden, 6 Vaibhav Khand, Indira Puram, Ghaziabad. ------Petitioner

Versus

1- PVVNL through Executive Engineer, Electricity Urban Distribution Division – VIII, Shipra Sun City, Indira Puram, Ghaziabad-201014 2- Express Garden Residents Welfare Association through President, R.W.A. Office, Ground Floor, Block-III, Express Garden, 6 Vaibhav Khand, Indira Puram, Ghaziabad-201014 3- Express Projects Pvt. Ltd. through Director, 810, Surya Kiran Building, 19 Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi. 4- Secure Meters Ltd., 401, 4th Floor Park Centra, Sector - 30, Delhi-Jaipur Highway Gurgaon-122001 ------Respondents

Order on the hearing dated 04/07/2017

The petitioner is absent. The respondent no. 1 Executive Engineer Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Electricity Urban Distribution Division VII , Ghaziabad is represented by Shri A.S. Rakhra Advocate.

Respondent No. 2 Express Garden RWA is represented by Counsel Shri Pramod Kumar Yadav, who submitted his Vakalatnama. Respondent No. 3 M/S Express Projects Pvt. Ltd. is represented by S.K. Jain, authority holder.

M/S Secure Meters Ltd. which has been arrayed as respondent No. 4, is being represented by Shri Jitendra Yadav.

The authorised representative of respondent No. 3, M/S Express Projects Pvt. Ltd. stated that as directed by the CGRF, Meerut, they have given their No Objection Certificate to the concerned Executive Engineer for the change of meter in the name of RWA, OP No. 1 in the complaint before the CGRF (here respondent No. 2 in the petition) and thus they have complied that part of the order of CGRF which relates to them. Counsel for the Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Shri A.S. Rakhra Advocate stated that though the respondent no. 3 M/S Express Project might have given their NOC to the concerned authority, they should not seek the refund of security amount etc which has been deposited by them as they might have charged the same from the residents / allottees, and thus they should facilitate the transfer of earlier deposited security etc. in the name of RWA (Respondent No. 2) so that order of the CGRF is complied. Counsel for the respondent no. 2 (RWA) requested for the copy of impugned order of CGRF which was given to him. Representative of the respondent no. 4 (M/S Secure Meters) stated that as they have requested in their earlier application, they were neither a party in the proceedings before CGRF, nor the CGRF has passed any order for them, therefore they should be exonerated from these proceedings. The Commission, clarified the point raised by the respondent no. 4, that they have been impleaded as a party to these proceedings, because it is alleged that unauthorised charges are being collected through the meter supplied by them, which is in violation of the Tariff Order of the Commission.

The Commission ordered that all the respondents, including the respondent no. 4 M/S Secure Meters Ltd., shall make their submissions through their affidavits before the Commission, by the next date.

Respondent no. 3 shall also state in their affidavit with details, that whether they have charged any amount from the allottees / buyers / occupiers of the premises for security deposit of electricity connection or not.

List on 24th July, 2017 at 15:00 hrs.

(S.K. Agarwal) (Desh Deepak Verma) Member Chairman

Dated: .07.2017