- (1.) M/s. Galaxy Auto Axel Pvt. Ltd (GAAPL), Gat No. 323, Vathar tarfe Vadgaon, Tal. Hatkanangale, Distt. Kolhapur has filed a complaint on 28 January, 2014 against the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. (MSEDCL) for non -compliance of the Electricity Ombudsman, Mumbai's Order dated 1 October, 2013 in Representation No. 71 of 2013.
(2.) The Complainants prayers are as follows: " Section 64
(3.) The Complainant has submitted that: (a) GAAPL is an industrial consumer of MSEDCL (Consumer No.250119005870). Its connection was initially sanctioned in the name of M/s Rajesh Motors Pvt. Ltd. on 11 February, 2004 for contract demand of 145 kW(77 KVA), and categorized as HT Industrial. (b) On 20 October, 2009, GAAPL applied for a change of name in respect of its connection, and for the same purpose, viz. Industrial (Automobile Workshop and building). The connection was accordingly transferred in its name on 20 October, 2009. (c) After the change of name, neither the sanctioned load nor the purpose of use were amended, nor was any amendment sought by GAAPL since these had not changed. M/s Rajesh Motors and GAAPL are separate businesses which are operating in the same Gat No.323 but are separated by a wall. M/s Rajesh Motors is in the business of sale of trucks. (d) On 19 November, 2012, GAAPL applied to the Executive Engineer, MSEDCL, Jaisingpur stating that it had planned replacement of machinery in the next 4 months and that, during that period, its load would be reduced to 25 to 30 HP while lighting load would remain unaltered. MSEDCL's Satara Flying Squad visited GAAPL's premises on 28 (e) December, 2012. In order to ensure that the MSEDCL authorities were aware of its letter dated 19 November, 2012, GAAPL sent a copy to the Superintending Engineer, MSEDCL, Kolhapur also on 11 January, 2013. (f) However, ignoring both these letters, the Flying Squad assessed GAAPL's industrial load as 18.5 HP, with the remaining load being lighting. The Flying Squad concluded further that the actual purpose of use is Commercial and not Industrial. Based on these findings, the Executive Engineer, MSEDCL, Jaisingpur served a supplementary bill of Rs.10,37,051/ - on GAAPL under section 126 of the Electricity Act (EA), 2003 on 31 January, 2013. (g) Drawing attention to its earlier letters, GAAPL visited and then wrote to the Superintending Engineer, MSEDCL, Kolhapur seeking detailed justification and computations, but was only told to pay the bill or appeal under S. 127. (h) As per the Govt. of Maharashtra notifications and authorisations, the responsibility of inspection and assessment of HT consumers lies with Superintending Engineer/ Chief Engineer of MSEDCL. Hence the bill, based on the inspection report of a Deputy Executive Engineer, is illegal and cannot be considered as a final bill under S. 126 of the EA, 2003. (i) The Complainant approached the concerned Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) for redressal. However, CGRF held that the matter was beyond its jurisdiction. (j) GAAPL challenged the CGRF Order before the Electricity Ombudsman, Mumbai who decided its Representation No.71 of 2013 on 1 October, 2013. The Ombudsman set aside CGRF's Order and quashed the impugned supplementary bill of Rs.10,37,051/ -. He further directed MSEDCL to refund the amounts recovered from the Complainant on the basis of that bill along with interest. ;