By the Court.—Heard Sri Ram Swaroop Umrao, learned counsel for Corporation and learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents.

2. It is contended that the impugned demand has been raised on the basis of so called testing of meter without showing any defect or even doubt in respect of seals of the meter in the report dated 17.2.2017, without complying with the requirement of Rule 5.6(d)(i) of the U.P. Electricity Supply Code, 2005 by issuing notice to consumer giving intimation for alleged testing of the meter seals and therefore, the alleged demand including the alleged testing report is illegal and in violation of the procedure prescribed in Rules. Reliance is placed on a Division Bench jugment of this Court in Smt. Amrawati Devi v. Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited and another, 2009(1) ADJ 430 (DB), Mohd. Sagir v. Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited and others, 2014(6) ADJ 219 (DB) and M/s. Modern Rice Mill v. Madhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited and another, 2012(1) ADJ 296.

3. In Amrawati (supra), a co-ordinate Bench of this Court while dealing with the issue of right of a consumer to get the defective meter properly sealed and tested either at the laboratory of Electricity Corporation or at the laboratory of some other independent agency holding thus:

4. Shri Rai has urged that the respondents should have informed the petitioner that she had a right to get the sealed meter tested either at the laboratory of the Nigam or at the laboratory of some other independent agency. In absence of any information by the officers of the Nigam or knowledge the petitioner cannot be presumed to have waived her right to get the sealed Secure Meter tested at the laboratory of some other independent agency. On the other hand Shri Dube, learned counsel for the respondents has urged that the petitioner did not avail the opportunity when the meter was sealed and she was asked to appear on 4.12.2008, that she wants to get the sealed Secure Meter tested at the laboratory of some other independent agency. The seal of the meter was opened on 4.12.2008 and it was tested in the presence of the petitioner. Clause 5.6(c)(iii) of Code 2005 provides for only one opportunity and that has not been availed by the petitioner on 26.11.2008 and now it is not open to the petitioner to claim that the Secure Meter No. UPE 62373 be tested by an independent agency.

5. Clause 5.6(c)(iii) of U.P. Electricity Supply Code 2005 is extracted below:

“5.6 Defective Meters:

(a) The Licensee shall have the right to test any meter and related apparatus if there is a reasonable doubt about the accuracy of the meter and the consumer shall provide the Licensee necessary assistance in conduct of test. However, the consumer shall be allowed to be present during the testing.

(b) A consumer may request the Licensee to test the meter installed on his premises if he doubts its accuracy of meter readings not commensurate with his consumption of electricity, stoppage of meter, damage to seal, by applying to the Licensee in prescribed format (Annexure 5.1) alongwith the requisite testing fee. The Licensee shall test the meter:

i. Within 15 days of the receipt of the application, at consumer’s premises, or

ii. Within 30 days at licensee’s lab, or Independent lab, or

iii. By installing a tested check meter in series with the existing meter within 7 days of filing of application.

(c) In case of testing of meter at consumer’s premises, the testing of meter shall be done for a minimum consumption of 1 kWh. The meter testing team of the licensee shall carry heating load of sufficient capacity to carry out the testing. Optical Scanner may be used for counting the pulses/revolutions or meter shall be tested as per the procedure described in IS/IER 1956 or through aqua-check for LT meters and through RSS for others. The aqua Check and RSS shall be calibrated in laboratory of national repute once in a year.

(i) In case the meter is found O.K., no further action shall be taken