HEMANT GUPTA, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in the present writ petition is to Regulation 15 of the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matter) Regulations, 2007 (for short the Regulations), as amended vide notification dated 24.05.2010 in respect of security amount alleging it to be unjust, arbitrary, illegal and ultra vires of the Electricity Act, 2003.
(2.) THE relevant Regulation reads as under: 15. Security (Consumption) 15.1 different categories of consumers will maintain Security (Consumption) as below: 15.1.1. Consumers other than Large Supply Industrial consumers will maintain as security with the Licensee an amount equivalent to consumption charge (i.e. Fixed and variable charges as applicable) for two and a half months where bi - monthly billing is applicable and one and a half months in case of monthly billing, during the period of agreement for supply of electricity. It is averred that the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission was constituted under the repealed Electricity Regulatory Commission Act, 1998 and the same has been notified as the State Commission under S.86 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short 'the Act'). The Act enumerates functions of the State Commission which, inter alia, relates to determination of tariff for generation, supply, transmission and wheeling of electricity, wholesale, bulk or retail, as the case may be within the State. The State Commission is empowered to frame Regulations consistent with the provisions of the Act and Rules in terms of S.181 of the Act. It is pleaded that earlier the interest free security against consumption was deposited by the members of the petitioner Association ranging up to 30% of the monthly consumption called as 'Advance Consumption Deposit'. The impugned regulations including Regulations 14 to 20 notified on 29.07.2007 are said to be without any statutory support as it is averred that there is no provision to base the Security (Consumption) on the basis of the billing cycle. It is alleged that the billing cycle is established by the Commission for its convenience and it is wrong to link with the quantum of Security (Consumption). Initial Security (Consumption) as per Regulation 15 was an amount equivalent to consumption charges for three months, where monthly bill is applicable and two months in case of monthly billing as security during the period of agreement for supply of electricity. The earlier notification prior to amendment on 24.05.2010 reads as under: 15. Security (Consumption) 15.1 Consumers will maintain with the Licensee an amount equivalent to consumption charges (i.e. fixed charges and variable charges as applicable) for three months where bi - monthly billing is applicable and two months in case of monthly billing as security during the period of agreement for supply of electricity. Consumption charges will be worked out on the basis of average monthly consumption of an existing consumer over a period of twelve months immediately before coming into force of these Regulations.
(3.) IT is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in terms of S.47 of the Act, the Regulations in respect of Security can be framed only if a distribution licensee requires for the payment to it of all monies which may become due to it. It is contended that there is no request from the licensee such as respondent No.2 for deposit of the security amount, therefore, the action of the Board in framing the Regulations is beyond the provisions of the Statute.;