Hon’ble Sunil Ambwani, J.—Heard Shri H.P. Dube, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ashutosh Mishra, caveator for the respondent No. 2. With the consent of the parties, the matter was heard and is being finally decided.

2. The ‘Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Bhikaripur, Varanasi’ through its Managing Director-petitioner No. 1 and the Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division, Fatehpur-petitioner No. 2 have filed this writ petition to set aside an award of the ‘Electricity Ombudsman’ made under Section 42 (7) of (The) Electricity Act, 2003.

3. Shri Gopal Krishan Gupta, Managing Director of M/s Shyam Ferrous Ltd., Fatehpur (the unit) applied for sanction of 3000 KVA connection. In his application he stated that he was one of the best consumers of electricity for last ten years of 3000 K.V.A. electricity which was connected with 33 K.V. Fatehpur Feeder. On account of unstable market and resultant financial difficulties, he had requested on 20.6.2006 for four months temporary disconnection. The permission was not given, on which, he paid all the dues and got the electricity permanently disconnected on 31.7,2006. As soon as his financial condition improved he made an application on June, 2007 after depositing Rs. 3,000 and completing all the formalities for 3000 K\ A electricity connection. The consumer cited the example of five induction furnaces and rolling mills at Fatehpur fed from UPSIDC feeder, and the difficulty of establishing independent feeder across. railway lines and about 4 km. of agricultural land. He pleaded that the unit will have to spent Rs. 50 lacs for the cost of independent feeder, which the unit will be unable to bear.

4. The unit was not allowed the connection on the ground that under Clause 3.4 (a) of the U.P. Electricity Supply Code, 2005, the connection for 3000 KVA could only be given by an independent feeder and that it was not possible to establish an independent feeder as there was a railway track and about 5 kms agricultural land in between the sub station and the industry. The consumer approached the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Fatehpur with his complaint. The forum, consisting of three members including a Chairman, instead of deciding the matter, allowed the Executive Engineer/Presiding Officer of the forum to consider and decide the application. The application was disposed of on 17.11.2007 under the signatures of the Presiding Officer of the forum.

5. Shri P. Ram. the Presiding Officer of the Forum observed in his order dated 17.11.2007 that the petitioner’s application for connection can be allowed only by giving the approval of the load under Clause 3.4 (a) of the U.P. Electricity Supply Code, 2005 by an independent feeder. The application has been forwarded to the higher authority. In respect of the sanction of the load of 3000 KVA to M/s Laxmi Katsin Ltd., Malwa dated 17.11.2007, the sanction of the load was forwarded by him to the Managing Director, Purvanchal, Varanasi. The representation was disposed of with direction that the electricity connection can be sanctioned only by an independent feeder.

6. The consumer filed an appeal with the ‘Electricity Ombudsman’ on the grounds that he is suffering recurring losses and that the cost of establishment of an independent feeder and system loading charges (to be paid to UPSIDC) will come to about 1 crore. The ‘Electricity Ombudsman’ after hearing both the parties on 11.12.2007 and 26.12.2007 and after considering the records found that the recommendations for the independent feeder under para 3.4 (1) of the U.P. Electricity Supply Code, 2005 has been made in favour of the consumer. There is no technical objection to supply electricity through 33 KV Fatehpur Feeder and 132 K.V. Sub Station. The dispute was confined to provide electricity from either the independent feeder or 33 K.V. Fatehpur Feeder by tapping. According to para 3.4 (d) where there is difficulty of the way or it is not possible to establish indepe