IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Harish Tandon, J.
Abdul Hamid and Ors. – Appellants
Vs.
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited and Ors. – Respondents
W.P. 3052(W) of 2017
Decided On : 16-05-2017
Electricity Charges - Late Payment Surcharge - Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 - The court considered the legality of late payment surcharges demanded by the Distribution Company and the entitlement to recover the same. The court analyzed the provisions of Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Regulations framed thereunder. It held that the late payment surcharge demanded for the first time after a period of two years from when such sum became first due is illegal and contrary to the statutory provisions. The court set aside the demand for late payment surcharge and directed the Distribution Company to restore the electricity supply.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners had their electricity supply disconnected due to non-payment of electricity charges and late payment surcharge. The petitioners argued that the late payment surcharge demanded for the first time after a period of two years from when such sum became first due is illegal. The court considered the provisions of Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Regulations framed thereunder to determine the legality of the late payment surcharge.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the demand for the late payment surcharge for the first time after a period of two years when such sum becomes first due is illegal, contrary to the provision contained in Section 56(2) of the Act and the Regulations framed there under. The court set aside the demand for late payment surcharge and directed the Distribution Company to restore the supply of electricity within 72 hours.
Issues: The main issue was whether the late payment surcharges, if not continuously shown in the bills periodically, raised, or if not raised after the disconnection of electricity for non-payment of electricity charges for more than two years, is legally recoverable in view of Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the provisions of Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Regulations framed thereunder to conclude that the late payment surcharge demanded for the first time after a period of two years from when such sum became first due is illegal and contrary to the statutory provisions. The court held that the Distribution Company cannot recover the late payment surcharge under such circumstances.
Final Decision: The court set aside the demand for late payment surcharge and directed the Distribution Company to restore the supply of electricity within 72 hours.
Harish Tandon, J.
1. An important and legal point has arisen in the instant writ petition required to be answered by this Court. Before proceeding to formulate the point, the salient facts, which are more or less undisputed, are adumbrated herein below-
The West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as Distribution Company) provided the electric connection to energize mini submersible pumps to both the petitioners having Consumer Nos. 163099442 and 163090423 for irrigation purposes. By virtue of a family arrangement/settlement the petitioner No. 2 is permitted to use and occupy the land belonging to the petitioner No. 2 and therefore was also using the meter allotted to the petitioner No. 2 for such purposes. The Distribution Company raised the bill on quarterly basis indicating the charges for consumption of electricity, which was duly paid. However, because of the fact that petitioner No. 1 was diagnosed with a chronic heart ailment and had to undergo a bypass surgery, the cultivation could not be done by him nor the petitioners could pay the electric charges to the Distribution Company, which led to the disconnection of electric supply through the meters installed therein on 12th December, 2012 and 13th December, 2012 respectively.
2. After recovery from the said ailment, the petitioner No. 1 applied for reconnection and paid the outstanding dues as demanded by the Distribution Company together with the reconnection charges. The electric supply was restored on 15th December, 2015. The officials of the Distribution Company came to inspect the meter reading for generation of the bill for the month of December, 2015 and it was informed to the petitioners that the said meter is defective because of it being unused for a long time. The bill for the month of June, 2016 was raised which not only contained the charges towards consumption of electricity during the period after restoration but also late payment surcharge to the tune of Rs. 87,540.27 Paisa and Rs. 1,15,298.37 Paisa. An application was filed before the Distribution Company to exempt from paying the aforesaid exorbitant amount, which was turned down by the Distribution Company on 19th January, 2016. The Distribution Company issued a Disconnection Notice upon the petitioner, which led the filing of writ petition being WP No. 1644(W) of 2016 before this Court.
3. While disposing of the writ petition on 30th March, 2016, a submission was advanced on behalf of the petitioners, which was also recorded therein that during the pendency of the said writ petition a revised bill was issued by the Distribution Company and the energy charges so claimed had already been deposited. It is, further recorded in the said order that the sole grievance remained over the entitlement of the Distribution Company to insist for the late payment surcharges. A direction was passed upon the petitioners to make a comprehensive representation before the Station Manager, Polba Customer Care Centre, who was directed to dispose of the same within a stipulated time and communicate the decision to the petitioner within one week thereafter.
4. In due compliance of the said liberty given to the petitioners, a comprehensive representation was made and the competent authority communicated its decision dated 06.05.2016 to the petitioners. The contention of the petitioners that the late payment surcharge cannot be charged beyond two years in terms of Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 was turned down simply on the ground that unless the defaulted amount is paid, the late payment surcharge cannot be calculated and charged to the consumer. In other words, it is stated that the moment the petitioner paid the outstanding amount dues of electricity charges, the late payment surcharge is calculated and is reflected in the bill raised immediately after the restoration of the electricity upon payment thereof and took shelter under Clause 7.2.13 of West Bengal Elect
Kedar Singh & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Anr.
M.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Radhey Shyam Sahu & Ors.
P. Virudhachalan Vs. Management of Lotus Mills
Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd. Vs. DVS Steels and Alloys Pvt. Ltd.
Rashi Metal Private Limited Vs. West Bengal State Electricity Boar and Others
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.