The main legal point established is the application of the multiplying factor in electricity billing and the interpretation of Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act.

JUDGMENT :

1. RULE, returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the present matter is taken-up for final hearing.

1.1. By way of the present Petition, petitioner herein is aggrieved by the order dated 07.11.2020 passed by the respondent no.2 – Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. in case No. UGA-03-005-2020-21, directing the petitioner to revise the bill and issue the bill from the date of checking i.e. from 03.09.2016, considering the Multiplier Factor (for short ‘M.F.’- 2) and holding that the earlier period bill is not to be amended.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Petition read thus:

2.1. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent no.1 is having LTMD connection NO. 23002005444 with contracted load of 44 KW. The meter of the respondent no.1 was replaced on 03.02.2009 vide checking sheet no. 001315, with multiplier factor-2.

2.2. On 03.09.2016, there was a regular checking, which did not look into the aspect of multiplier factor. The checking was only for accuracy of load. Thereafter on 16.09.2020, the connection of the respondent no.1 was checked. Thereafter, once again the meter was checked on 21.09.2020 vide checking sheet no. 59350; it was found that the meter capacity was 100/5 and C.T. Coil’s capacity was 200/5. The said details tallied with the details mentioned in the meter replacement proforma dated 03.02.2009. The multiplying factor was in consonance with the meter and C.T. capacity. The said checking sheet is duly produced at Annexure-D.

2.3. Having coming to the knowledge of the petitioner, a supplementary bill came to be issued to the respondent no.1 for Rs.6,95,872.06 Ps. On 21.09.2020, the differential amount was charged for consumption of electricity, due to the mistake in considering multiplying factor at 1 instead of 2. Being aggrieved by the said bill, the respondent no.1 herein approached the respondent no.2 – Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum of UGVCL, wherein, the complaint came to be registered as complaint No. UGA-03-005-2020-21. By the impugned order dated 07.11.2020, the respondent no.2 directed the petitioner to revise the bill from 03.09.2016 till the date of issuance of the bill. The respondent no.2 also directed the petitioner to hold departmental inquiry against the concerned officers.

2.4. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the respondent no.2 in complaint No. UGA-03-005-2020-21 dated 07.11.2020, the petitioner herein approached this Court seeking the following reliefs :

“(A) To allow this petition.

(B) To issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 7.11.200 passed by Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. in case No. UGA-03-005-2020-21 directing the petitioner to revise the bill and issue the bill from 3.9.2016 and upheld bill dated 18.9.2020 issued by the petitioner.

(C) To stay, the execution, implementation and operation of the order dated 7.11.2020 passed by Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. in case No. UGA-03-005-2020-21 directing the petitioner to revise the bill and issue the bill issue the bill from 3.9.2016 and upheld bill dated 18.9.2020 issued by the petitioner.

(D) To grant ad-interim relief in terms of Para-9(C).

(E) To award the cost of this petition.

(F) To grant such other and further reliefs as may be deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court in the interest of justice.”

3. Heard Ms. L.K. Bhaya, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. M.R. Molavi, learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.1.

3.1. Ms. L.K. Bhaya, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondent no.2 failed to appreciate that at the time of replacement of meter on 03.02.2009, the multiplier factor was erroneously