The Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum is the appropriate body to resolve disputes regarding back-billing and procedural compliance by utility companies.

Notice bearing Lr. No. AAO / ERO / SDNR / JAO / Billing / SA / D.No. 210/19, dated 30.03.2019, Award dated 21.11.2020 passed by the 2 nd respondent, confirmed by the 1 st respondent Award dated 23.09.2022 in Appeal No.29/2020-21 are challenged in this Writ Petition.

2. It is submitted that petitioner company established its unit in Survey No.17-8,9 situated at Nandigam Village, Anthireddyguda Road, Ranga Reddy. It is stated that cotton crop would be seasonal and petitioner would operate seasonally mostly for three to four months every year and load would be more during that period.

It is stated that petitioner company applied for 3 LT (with contracted load 65 HP) connections and paid necessary charges as estimated by the TSSPDCL and granted three connections vide SC. Nos. 350100901, 350100902 and 350100828 each connection had 65 HP load and had been paying the consumption charges without any default since 2007. While so, the department had extended supply through 3 Nos. DTR’s with capacity of 100 KVA, 63 KVA & 63 KVA through three different meters on a single panel board. If a DTR is failed or AB Switch & edge fuse is failed, the load is automatically shifted to other transformer and other meter and because of the said problem only during 2015, extra load was recorded on SC.

No. 350100901. It is relevant to submit at this juncture that total contracted load in 3 meters never exceeded above 195 HP (65HP X 3 service meters). Due to excess of load in respect of SC. No. 350100901, TSSPDCL raised bill for February, 2015 to April, 2015 as per HT Tariff and petitioner had paid the said amount. t Is submitted that at the threat of disconnection of supply and case amount included in the CC bills issued to the petitioner and the petitioner have paid the case amount forcibly on 20.02.2017, but the department have increased the contracted load from 65 HP to 120HP in the month of February, 2018 without collecting any agreement and test report from the petitioner company and issued CC bills with HT tariff from February, 2018 onwards though there is no consumption except lighting load and bore well load. In fact from February, 2018 onwards abnormal bills were issued approximately Rs.54,000/-per month till September, 2018 and petitioner paid excess amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- as TSSPDCL engineers have forced them to pay the amount of sanction of estimate and for release of HT service by clubbing 3 LT services.It is stated that petitioner applied for clubbing of 3 LT to single HT connection and paid development charges on 07.09.2018 at Rs. 2,13,600/- for additional load. Though application was made in September, 2018, the 8th respondent clubbed all the three services into single HT service No. RJN 2197 on 14.06.2019 and illegally collected HT bills up to July, 2019. While so, the 5 th respondent issued letter dated 15.09.2018 wherein petitioner was directed to pay Rs.12,50, 168/-. The representative of petitioner had approached the 5th respondent to know the details on which back-billing was issued and informed that back-billing is illegal since operations undertaken by the company is seasonal. Then the 5th respondent issued notice dated 30.03.2019 directing petitioner to pay Rs.6,68,206/-; the 5th respondent neither explained the reasons nor given any break for issuing such demand. It is stated that Respondents 3 to 6 failed to follow the procedure as contemplated in the General Terms and Conditions of supply as approved by the Regulatory Commission before issuing the back- bill.

Challenging the back-billing notice dated30.03.2019, petitioner filed complaint before the 2ndrespondent forum by raising various grounds and requested to direct Respondents 8 and 6 to withdraw the back-billing notice and to revise the electricity bills during the period 02/2018 - 03/2018 with LT rates instead of HT rates and also directed to pay compensation of Rs. 10 lacs. The 2nd respondent – Consumer Grievance Redresesal Forum of TSSPDCL taken up the complaint on