Ref. No. Member Secretary/MSEDCL/CGRF/BNDUZ/
Case No.521
Date :
Hearing Dt. 17/02/2014
In the matter of recovery for wrong M.F.
M/s. Wraptech Machine Pvt. Ltd.,
-
Applicant
-
Respondent
Vs.
M.S.E.D.C.Ltd., Vashi Division.
Present on behalf
A - On behalf of CGRF, Bhandup
1) Shri S.K. Chaudhari, Chairman, CGRF Bhandup.
2) Shri. R.M. Chavan, Member Secretary CGRF Bhandup
3) Dr. Smt. Sabnis, Member, CGRF, Bhandup.
B - On behalf of Appellant
1) Shri. Suraj Chakraborty
– Consumer Representative
C - On behalf of Respondent
1) Shri. A.P. Deshmukh Dy. Ex. Engineer, Vashi Sub Division.
ORDER
M/s. Wraptech Machine Pvt. Ltd is a Industrial consumer having 3 phase
LT supply through C.T. operated meter under service connection No.
000071313395 at Plot No. D-273, MIDC, Tubhe. The consumer is having
sanctioned load of 32 HP with demand of 44 KVA.
The electric supply was released on 3rd April 1986 under Industrial tariff.
The consumer was normally billed with multiplying factor of 2 till
December 2010. However the utility change the billing multiplying factor to 1
in the January 2011 on its own.
521of 2014
Page 1
In the month of January 2014 during verification, it was noticed by the
Respondent that consumer was underbilled due to wrong M.F.
The Respondent corrected the billing multiplying factor in the month of
January 2014; however the supplementary bill was issued to the consumer for
underbilling for the period of January 2011 to December 2013 i.e. for 36 months.
The Respondent vide his letter Dy. EE/Vashi/sub div./325 dt. 20.01.2014
has issued notice for disconnection of power supply for non-payment of
supplementary bill amounting Rs. 475639.77 and hence complainant approached
this Forum for interim relief against the disconnection and the disputed
supplementary bill.
On behalf of consumer Shri. Suraj Chakraborty was present. According to
him the inspection of the premises carried on 25th January 2014 by the Junior
Engineer and supplementary bill for underbilling due to wrong multiplying factor
was issued for the period of January 2011 to December 2013 (around 36 months)
to the tune of Rs. 475639.77. He contended that Respondent has changed the
M.F. on its own hence consumer is not guilty, therefore the demand of
supplementary bill due to change in M.F. is illegal and baseless. He prayed for
widrawal of excess supplementary bill.
The consumer representative showed his willingness to pay for the period
of last 24 months as per the provision of 56 (2) of Electricity Act. 2003.
On behalf of utility Shri. A.P. Deshmukh, Dy. Executive Engineer, Vashi sub
division was present. He conceded that the M.F. of the meter was wrongly
changed by the utility’s staff in the month of January 2011 and due to which the
consumer was underbilled for the period of 36 months. He further argued that the
demand is raised only for the utilized energy and no delayed payment charges or
interest is levied in the supplementary bill.
The matter was heard on 17.02.2014, both the parties were present. The
documents on record and arguments during the proceeding reveal that the
multiplying factor of the meter was changed from 2 to 1 in the month of January
2011 there by consumer was billed merely 50% lesser. against his regular
consumption. It is also true that utility made this change on its own, but Forum
feels that the irresponsible working of any personel can not attribute the loss to the
521of 2014
Page 2
government or in other word the consumer can not avail of the benefit of any
irresponsible working of any employee.
The Gist of the Representation is “change in multiplying factor of the meter.”
In the present case the power supply of the consumers is connected
through C.T. of ratio 100/5A and meter provided is of CT ratio 50/5A. the P.T. ratio
of consumer P.S. and meter is same i.e. 3 x 240.
The scale of the meter is uniform and hence the scale factor is one.
However in case of cramped scale it is in the ratio of 1/10/100 etc.
It will be more proper to see how the multiplying factor is derived.
So, multiplying factor (M.F.) = connected C.T. ratio x connected P.T. ratio
x scale factor
Meter C.T. ratio x meter P.T. ratio
in the present case the abbreviations used
a)
b)
c)
C.T. Current Transformer and
P.T. – Potential Transformer
Scale Factor of the meter is one.
M.F. = 100/5 x 3/ 240 x 1
50/5 x 3x 240
M.F. = 2
In this case the multiplying factor should be 2, so that consumer can be
billed as per his consumption.
Forum observed that consumer is underbilled due to change in M.F. by
50% of the total consumption from January 2011 to December 2013. i.e. in 36
months. The Licensee has issued the supplementary bill for 36 months. It will be
worth to see whether the Licensee is allowed to recover the charges for the period
which is not shown continuously in the bill and suddenly can raise the demand by
the way of supplementary bill. This required to refer the pertaining provisions of the
521of 2014
Page 3
Electricity Act 2003. The complainant has referred the section 56 sub section 2 of
Electricity Act 2003 which speaks as.
56(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other
law for the time being in force, no sum due from any consumer,
under this section shall be recoverable after the period of two
years from the date when such sum become first due unless such
sum has been shown continuously as recoverable as arrear of
charges for electricity supplied and the licensee shall not cut off
the supply of the electricity.
The Forum further observed that in the similar case, Hon’ble Bombay High
Court in W.P. No. 10764 of 2011 (MSEDCL, Sindhdurg Vs BSNL Deogad,
Sindhudurg) referred the matter to the larger Bench owing to the conflict between
the two judgments of the Division Benches for the correct interpretation of the
provisions of section 56(2) of Electricity Act. Hon’ble G.S. Godbole Judge of
Bombay High Court in the same W.P. requested Hon’ble Chief Justice to refer the
issue to the larger bench consisting of at least 3 Judges. Hence the present
Representation which is on similar matter pertains to sub section 2 of 56 of
Electricity Act and therefore sub judised.
The Forum also observed that consumer is ready to pay towards demand
for 24 months and also confirm to obey the decision of the larger bench as and
when it decided.
ORDER
As elaborated above and considering willingness of complaint to pay for last
underbilled 24 months the Forum direct the utility to issue the supplementary bill
only for 24 months period preceding the date of inspection and balance amount for
remaining 12 months should be kept in abeyance and should not be added in the
current bill coloum. The balance amount should be shown separately in the bill as
“arrears” subject to the decision of larger bench as and when decided. The Hon’ble
larger bench decision will be binding on both the parties.
521of 2014
Page 4
The Representation is disposed of in terms of the above order.
No order as to cost.
Both the parties should be informed accordingly.
The order is issued under the seal of Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum
M.S.E.D.C. Ltd., Bhandup Urban Zone, Bhandup on 28th February 2014.
Note:
1) If Consumer is not satisfied with the decision, he may file representative within 60
days from date of receipt of this order to the Electricity Ombudsman in attached "Form
B".
Address of the Ombudsman
The Electricity Ombudsman,
Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission,
606, Keshav Building,
Bandra - Kurla Complex, Bandra (E),
Mumbai - 400 051
2) If utility is not satisfied with order, it may file representation before the Hon. High
Court within 60 days from receipt of the order.
521of 2014
Page 5