2007 (8) TMI 821 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Power of the Electricity Regulatory Commission to issue general directions.
2. Jurisdiction of the Commission to adjudicate individual consumer grievances.
3. Legality of blanket orders for refunding amounts collected through supplementary/amended bills.
4. Proper forum for redressal of individual consumer grievances under the Electricity Act, 2003.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Power of the Electricity Regulatory Commission to Issue General Directions:
The Supreme Court examined whether the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (the Commission) had the authority to issue general directions to licensees/distribution companies. The Court held that the Commission has the power to issue general directions to ensure compliance with statutory provisions and prevent public harassment. This power is derived from various sections of the Electricity Act, 2003, including Sections 45(5), 55(2), 57, 62, 86, 128, 129, and 181.

2. Jurisdiction of the Commission to Adjudicate Individual Consumer Grievances:
The Court clarified that the Commission does not have the jurisdiction to adjudicate individual consumer grievances. This power is limited to disputes between licensees and generating companies as specified in Section 86(1)(f) of the Act. Individual consumer grievances should be addressed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and the Ombudsman as established under Section 42(5) and (6) of the Act.

3. Legality of Blanket Orders for Refunding Amounts Collected Through Supplementary/Amended Bills:
The Commission had issued a blanket order directing the refund of amounts collected through supplementary/amended bills without conducting a proper investigation. The Supreme Court found this approach unsustainable. The Court emphasized that such directions could only be issued after a thorough investigation and obtaining a report under Section 128 of the Act. The Commission's blanket order for refunds was deemed beyond its jurisdiction.

4. Proper Forum for Redressal of Individual Consumer Grievances Under the Electricity Act, 2003:
The Supreme Court reiterated that individual consumer grievances should be addressed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and the Ombudsman as per Section 42(5) and (6) of the Act. The Court directed that licensees/distribution companies should issue public notices inviting consumers to present their grievances. These grievances should be resolved by the licensees/distribution companies, and if consumers are unsatisfied, they can approach the appropriate forum under Section 42(5) and subsequently the Ombudsman under Section 42(6).

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court upheld the power of the Commission to issue general directions but found the blanket order for refunds without proper investigation unsustainable. The Court directed that individual consumer grievances should be addressed by the appropriate forums established under the Act. The appeal was disposed of with directions for licensees/distribution companies to issue public notices and resolve grievances, with further recourse available to the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and the Ombudsman.