Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 33790
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J
SRI P.M.HARISH S/O MAHADEVAPPA P.N. – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.12987 OF 2025 (GM - KEB)|WRIT PETITION No.12535 OF 2025 (GM - KEB)
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.LAKSHMY IYENGAR, SRI AKASH V.T., SRI PRABHULING K.NAVADGI, SRI ABHINAY S.
For the Respondents: SRI K.SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SRI UDAYA HOLLA, SMT.RACHEL RAJU ALICE, SRI K.N.PHANINDRA, SRI A.MAHESH CHOWDHARY, SMT.RASHI SINGH, SMT.KRISHIKA VAISHNAV
Mandatory installation of smart meters for electricity consumers violates consumer rights, emphasizing the necessity for consumer choice as guided by existing regulations.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (Pre-paid Smart Metering) Regulations 2024 - Petition to quash mandatory installation of smart meters - Court finds that consumers should not be forcefully required to install smart meters without options - Judicial discipline necessitates deferment to the Division Bench due to similar pending matters - Decision acknowledges the undertaking by the respondents not to enforce mandatory installation - Writ petitions disposed of. (Paras 9, 17, 18)
(B) Regulatory Authority - The authority must ensure regulations do not contravene consumer preferences and options provided under law - The regulatory guidelines should be applied uniformly and justly, preserving consumer rights. (Paras 6, 10)
Facts of the case:
Two writ petitions challenge the legality of mandated smart meter installations for electricity consumers, asserting that it contravenes previous regulations allowing consumer choice. Petitioners allege the costs are exorbitant compared to neighboring states, and seek the option to choose between smart and traditional meters.
Findings of Court:
The petitioners cannot be compelled to install smart meters; existing consumers should retain the choice of installing traditional meters, and the court urges following the ongoing proceedings in the Division Bench.
Issues: Whether consumers should be mandatorily required to install smart meters over traditional meters, and the propriety of adjudicating similar issues pending before the Division Bench.
Ratio Decidendi: The court rules that mandatory installation violates consumers’ choice and judicial discipline requires deferring to the Division Bench where similar matters are pending.
Result: Writ petitions disposed of in favor of petitioners, upholding consumer choice.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. consumers challenge mandatory smart meter installation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments on cost and corruption in guidelines. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's considerations on pending similar matters. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. judicial discipline requires non-interference with division bench. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. court orders respondents to allow consumer choice on smart meters. (Para 17 , 18) |
CAV ORDER
Both these petitions call in question communications dated 25-04-2025 and 02-04-2025 issued by the 3rd respondent respectively and the guidelines issued by the State Government in furtherance of the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (Pre-paid Smart Metering) Regulations, 2024 (‘the Regulations’ for short) made by the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (‘the Commission’ for short) concerning installation of pre/post paid smart meters.
2. Heard Smt. Lakshmy Iyengar, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.12987 of 2025; Sri Prabhuling K. Navadgi, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.12535 of 2025; Sri K.Shashikiran Shetty, learned Advocate General appearing for respondent No.1 in both the petitions and Udaya Holla, learned senior counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 in both the petitions and Sri K.N. Phanindra learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No.4 in Writ Petition No.12987 of 2025.
WRIT PETITION NO.12987 OF 2025:
3. The petitioner is a consumer of electricity from the hands of the Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited (‘the Company’ for short). On 26-09-2024 the 2nd respondent/ Company issued a Notification calling for applications from eligible tenderers. The Notification was for the purpose of selection of service provider for sale of smart meters to prospective consumers on rate contract basis in retail outlets for arranging power supply to new connections and commissioning of IT system for a period of 5 years and maintenance for a period of 10 years which would come within the precincts of the Company. On 23-12-2024 the contract is awarded in favour of the 4th respondent for the aforesaid purpose. After issuance of work order in favour of the 4th respondent, the 2nd respondent issues operational guidelines for smart meters, which is said to be mandating that the consumers shall install smart meters at their cost. The petitioner is said to have communicated to the 3rd respondent seeking installation of smart meter to a newly constructed house and also sought information about cost of old static meter and new smart meter that would be installed. The 3rd respondent is said to have communicated in return to the petitioner about the said cost of static meter and smart meter and further informed that the smart meter only should be installed. Therefore, contending that installation of only smart meter being contrary to guidelines or the Regulations of the Commission, the petitioner is before this Court.
WRIT PETITION NO.12535 OF 2025:
4. The petitioner, in this petition, is again a consumer of electricity. It is the case of the petitioner that the Commission had issued Regulations wherein the consumers had the option to avail power supply to their installations through pre-paid smart meters with effect from 1-04-2025. The Board of the Company passed a resolution to rollout smart meters through installation contract. The contract is awarded to one M/s Rajashree Electricals Private Limited, respondent No.4 in the companion petition. The Company later issued guidelines for smart meter rollout on 13-02-2025 and a circular later for implementation of the smart energy meter system. The Company then issues a Circular for adoption of smart energy meter which mandated such usage. The petitioner in the subject petition submits that when a requisition was made for converting single phase into three phase connection, the impugned communication comes about to the petitioner mandating the petitioner to procure a smart energy me
