{1}

wp 6935.12.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 6935 OF 2012

M/S G. T. L. Limited,

Franchise of M. S .E. D. C.Ltd.,

CIDCO, Cannought Place,

Aurangabad.

.. PETITIONER.

VERSUS

1)

M/s. Birla Perucchini Ltd.,,

Plot No. B-15/3/2, MIDC Waluj,

Aurangabad.

2)

Nodal Officer,

Office of Superintending Engineer,

M. S. E. D. C. Limited,

Aurangabad.

.. RESPONDENTS.

Advocate of Petitioner : Mr. Anil S. Bajaj.

Advocate for Respondent No. 1 : Mr. H. F. Pawar

Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. Dhananjay Deshpande

CORAM : K.K. SONAWANE,J.

DATE : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT :-

1]

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Matter is taken up

for final hearing with the consent of the learned counsel for the

parties.

2]

The petitioner has assailed the judgment and order

passed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum ( hereinafter

{2}

wp 6935.12.odt

referred to, as “the CGRF” for sake of brevity ) in case No.

CGRF/AZ/Aur/U/364/2011/44 dated 18.02.2012.

3]

The petitioner is the distribution franchisee of the

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd., ( hereinafter

referred to as “the MSEDCL” for sake of brevity ) which is the

Distribution Licencee in the State of Maharashtra. The schedule of

charges vide Commercial Circular No. 42 issued by the MERC is

applicable to the consumers of MSEDCL requiring supply of

electricity. The respondent No.1 – M/s. Birla Peruchini Ltd. is the

consumer of the MSEDCL and in the year 1998 has obtained 33KV

HT connection for supply of 2000 KVA for its industrial unit.

Thereafter, in the year 2011, the respondent No.1 preferred an

application to the petitioner for enhancement of contract demand

from 2000 KVA to 3750 KVA. The petitioner processed the

application and accorded sanction with estimate of sum of

Rs. 22,04,616/- for additional power supply to the industrial unit of

the respondent No.1. Accordingly, the respondent No.1 deposited

the entire amount of the bill under protest and raised objection

about the quantum of service connection charges of Rs. 1.95 Lacs .

It has been alleged that the service connection charges are

exorbitant and in excess in view of the schedule of charges

prescribed by the MERC. It has been contended that in case of

{3}

wp 6935.12.odt

enhancement of electricity load, the normative charges are essential

to be recovered from the consumer on the total load. Eventually,

the respondent No.1 - consumer approached to the Consumer

Grievance Redressal Forum and filed complaint to ventilate the

grievance about the excess amount of service charges. The CGRF

dealt with the complaint and pursuant to the verdict of the

Electricity Ombudsman in Representation No. 17 of 2011, passed the

impugned order as below :-

“1]

The grievance of the complainant/consumer is

hereby allowed, as follows :

2]

The load sanction order dated 4.7.2011 issued by

the respondent No.2 & GTL Ltd., is hereby quashed with

respect to Sr. No.(a) service connection charges

amounting to Rs.1,95,000/-.

3]

The respondent No.2 M/s. GTL Ltd. shall issue load

sanction order afresh regarding service connection

charges, as per order & findings recorded by the Hon'ble

Electricity Ombudsman, Nagpur in Representation No. 17

of 2011 M/s. Aayudh Tools Vs. S.E. MSEDCL (U)

Aurangabad & M/s. GTL Ltd. Aurangabad on 23.1.2012,

with fresh period of validity within a period of two weeks

from the date of receipt of this order.