HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 2170 OF 2024

O R D E R:

The above Writ Petition was filed challenging the order dated 12.12.2023 in Appeal No. 38 of 2023-24 issued by the 1^st respondent – Vidyut Ombudsman.

2. Petitioner, aggrieved by the provisional assessment made by Respondent - TGSPDCL vide Notice dated 22.12.2020 demanding back-billing of Rs.10,22,629/- from 10.12.2019 to 10.12.2020 and clubbing of service connections which are in the very same building, under the provisions of General Terms and Conditions of Supply, filed a complaint before the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Hyderabad South Circle - CG No. 106 of 2022-23. The Forum disposed of the said complaint by its Award dated 26.09.2022. Subsequently petitioner filed CMP No. 02 of 2022-23 in CG No. 106/2022-23 praying to implement the Award, however the Forum had closed the said petition on 06.04.2023.

2.1. It is the case of petitioner that in the meantime, Respondents dismantled seven Service Connections belonging to petitioner and questioning the same, CG Nos. 344 to 350 of 2022-23 were filed before the Forum. By the common Award dated 15.05.2023, complaints were allowed in part, directing the consumer/petitioner to pay the arrears against their respective Service Connections as per the final demand raised by Respondents and also directed them to dismantle the said Service Connections. It is contended by petitioner that they are in arrears of only Rs. 96,856/- but respondents debited Rs.22,86,385/- without power consumption and without raising any bills, which was illegal. Therefore, petitioner once again approached the Forum by filing a petition for compliance of the Award CG No. 349 of 2022-23 and for payment of compensation of Rs. 25,000/- as on 06.06.2023, thereafter, @ Rs.1000/- per day with effect from 07.06.2023 till filing of compliance and to withdraw Rs. 22,86,385/- and refund the same with interest @

24% p.a. till its refund.

2.2. Said petition dated 14.08.2023 was returned by the Forum on 30.09.2023. Aggrieved thereby, petitioner filed Appeal No. 38 of 2023-24 before the 1^st Respondent; by Award dated 12.12.2023, the said Appeal was dismissed confirming the Award of the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum. Questioning the order dated 12.12.2023, petitioner is before this Court.

2.3. Ms. Nishitha, learned counsel representing M/s Abdul Najeeb Khan, learned counsel for petitioner contends that order of the 1^st respondent is wholly illegal and he did not consider several issues raised by them, therefore, the said Award has to be set aside.

3. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy appearing for Respondents 2 to 6 contends that Writ Petition, as framed, is liable to be dismissed on the sole ground that neither the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum is made a party respondent to Writ Petition nor the Award passed by the Forum has been challenged. It is further contended that Respondents are empowered to club the services as per Clause 3.5 of General Terms and Conditions of Supply.

Clause 3.5 read as under.

3.5.1. For the purpose of GTCS, separate establishments shall include the following types of establishments:

i. Having distinct set-up and staff;

ii. Owned or leased by different persons;

iii. Covered by different licenses or registrations under any law where such procedures are applicable; and iv. For domestic category, the households having a separate kitchen.

3.5.3. Notwithstanding the above provisions, the Company reserves the right, where it is reasonably established, that the consumers of the same group or family or firm or company who are availing supply under different service connections situated within a single premises by splitting the units, the Company may treat such multiple connections existing in the single premises as a single service connection and charge the total consumption of all the consumers at the appropriate tariffs applicable for a single service connection. Any officer authorised by the Comp