Consumers are not entitled to voltage rebates if in arrears; however, amounts kept in abeyance do not constitute arrears for rebate eligibility under tariff provisions.

JUDGMENT :

Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.

These appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 03rd February 2020 passed in W.P. (C) No. 1284 of 2014 and W.P. (C) No. 5057 of 2015. L.P.A. No. 140 of 2020 arises from W.P. (C) No. 5057 of 2015 and L.P.A. No. 143 of 2020 arises from W.P. (C) No. 1284 of 2014.

2. W.P. (C) No. 1284 of 2014 was filed by the then Jharkhand State Electricity Board (now Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Limited and Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited) [hereinafter referred to as “Nigam”] and W.P. (C) No. 5057 of 2015 was filed by the Appellant. By the common impugned judgment, W.P. (C) No. 1284 of 2014 has been allowed and W.P. (C) No. 5057 of 2015 has been dismissed.

3. The appellant was having high tension electricity connection for a contract demand of 1500 KVA under 33 KV supply bearing consumer number HJAP-71. The dispute involved in both cases relates to ‘voltage rebate’. The total period involved in these cases is from May 2010 to July 2015. This period is governed by different tariffs as notified from time to time. W.P.(C) No.1284 of 2014 is covered by tariff 2010-11 (May 2010 to July 2011) and W.P.(C) No.5057 of 2015 is covered by tariff 2011-12 and 2012-13(August 2011 to July 2015).

W.P.(C) No. 1284 of 2014

4. W.P.(C) No.1284 of 2014 was filed on behalf of Nigam for quashing the order dated 09th October 2013 passed by the Electricity Ombudsman, Jharkhand in Appeal No. EOJ/03/2013 and also for quashing the order dated 25th May 2013 passed by Vidyut Upbhokta Shikayat Nivaran Forum, Chaibasa at Jamshedpur in Case No. 33/2011/06/2012. By the orders impugned in the writ petition, the appellant was held entitled to ‘voltage rebate’ for the period May 2010 to July 2011 and Nigam was directed to revise the bills.

5. The appellant had initially filed a consumer case before the Vidyut Upbhokta Shikayat Niwaran Forum, Ranchi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Forum’). The case was transferred to Forum at Chaibasa and numbered as Case No.33 of 2011. In the consumer case, the appellant had prayed for a direction upon Nigam to allow ‘voltage rebate’ as per the tariff 2010-11 applicable for the period from May 2010 to July 2011. On notice, Nigam appeared before the Forum. The stand taken by Nigam was that ‘voltage rebate’ was being allowed to the appellant in the light of letter dated 26th June 2004 with respect to the tariff order 2003-04 pursuant to which even the consumers in arrears were entitled for ‘voltage rebate’. However, after coming into force of tariff order 2010-11 issued by Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘Regulatory Commission’) both ‘voltage rebate’ and ‘load factor rebate’ are not available to the consumers who are in arrears. The consumer case was decided in favour of the appellant; the appeal filed by Nigam before the Electricity Ombudsman (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Ombudsman’) was also dismissed. It was the case of Nigam before the writ Court in W.P.(C) No.1284 of 2014 that the Forum as well as the Ombudsman had erroneously held that the appellant was entitled to get ‘voltage rebate’ under the tariff 2010-11 by erroneously interpreting the tarif