AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioner has challenged the majority view of order dated 22.2.2013 rendered by the Electricity Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum,
Kumaon Area, Haldwani (hereinafter referred to as the ''Forum'') in Complaint No.478 of 2012.
Key facts, necessary for the adjudication of this petition, are that the respondent was sanctioned electricity connection vide Connection
No.5520 of load 1100 KVA for use of the industry. The respondent violated the peak hour restrictions for the period 21.01.2010 to 31.03.2010
and as such a Bill for peak hour penalty was issued to the respondent. There were 18 days peak hour violations in February, 2010 and 26 days
peak hour violations for the month of March, 2010. The respondent challenged the bill (Annexure No.2) before the Forum by way of Complaint
no.478 of 2012. Vide majority view, the Forum allowed the complaint and quashed the bill. However, the Technical Member has taken a contrary
view.
The Court has gone through the orders rendered by the Majority Members as well as by the Minority Members. In the order dated
22.02.2013, it is repeatedly mentioned that the petitioners have not placed on record the tampering report as well as load survey. According to the
majority view, there could be violation of 1 hour time shift in the MRI. However, the Technical Member has a taken view that there could not be
more than half hour shifting. In case, there was shifting for one hour, the grid would have collapsed. The MRI is time-tested device. There could
not be variation of various watches for more than one hour. It is also strange that the MRI was not functioning normally in the months of January,
February and March, and thereafter, it has become normal. Learned Technical Member has also observed that in case there was any defect in the
MRI System, it should have been pointed out to the competent authority. Respondent was depositing his bills regularly for the last three years on
the basis of existing MRI system. The majority view has also held that the MRI system is very reliable. The majority view has erred in law as well
as on facts by recording findings that there was a shift of one hour without any technical verification. The Technical Member has the necessary
expertise to suggest whether the MRI system was functioning properly or there could be shifting of one hour. The majority view could not shift the
timing from 22:30 to 23:00 hours.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 22.2.2013 rendered by the majority is set aside. The minority view is upheld.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.