1. Electricity Regulations, Regulation 37.2(c) - A consumer who was not satisfied with the assessment order could prefer within 15 days of the assessment a representation before the authority designated for this purpose by the commission in respect of such licencee - Sub-clause (ii) of clause (c) states that authorized or designated authority will furnish copy of the final order to the consumer - A grievance which is possible must be confined to what the regulations themselves provided namely of either a representation before the authority as appointed by the Commission within a period of 15 days from the date of notice demanding the amount after assessment or a challenge that could be competent to resort through a writ petition when it can be pointed out that there were any statutory violations that would give rise to an inference that assessment made was not proper - Rakesh Kumar v. UHBVL C.W.P. No. 27521 of 2013 decided on 18.12.2013 has not been properly considered from the legal provisions - Not possible to follow the same. (177) PLR
  2. Electricity Rules - Transmission losses - Admittedly , the transmission lines have been installed by the appellant-plaintiff and to maintain the same as also the independent feeder from the substation in the premises is the responsibility and duty of the appellant-plaintiff - The losses in transmission have also been admitted to be dependent upon the quality of the electricity wires, which electricity wires have been installed by the appellant-plaintiff - If that be so, the transmission losses are at the hands of the appellant-plaintiff and for which, they cannot be given the benefit. (182) PLR
  3. Electricity Supply Act, 1948 (54 of 1948) - Internal Audit  objection is only an opinion and cannot be by itself a justification for raising of a supplementary or initial bill - The concerned authorities are required to examine whether there should have been clubbing of the two connections for purposes of raising of the bill based on material sought from the petitioners - This was apparently not done - Impugned decision has been taken only on the basis of the audit objection and is devoid of any reason - Liability cannot be fastened on a party merely on the basis of an audit note.  (174) PLR
  4. Electricity Supply Code, Regulations 2015, Clause 3.5(3)(a) - Request of the petitioner for fresh connection has been declined - For the purposes of a new connection, the rent agreement is required as proof of occupancy, which could only mean a rent agreement which was subsisting and pertained to the period when the new connection is applied for - Landlord first got the electricity supply to the premises disconnected on his request being the consumer as per Clause 9.2(1) of the Regulations and then a new electricity connection is not released to the tenant for his failure to comply with the conditions as per clause 3.5(3) of the Regulations - Rent Restriction Acts have enough teeth to protect the bonafide tenants from misuse of the above provisions - In the present context Section 10 and 19 of the East Punjab Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (III of 1949).(181) PLR
  5. Electricity Supply Regulations, 2010, Clause 10.1 - Joint Electricity Regulatory Commission (Electricity Supply Code) Regulation 2010 clause 10.5, sub clause (f) - Respondents after conducting checking of the premises of the petitioner, were bound to give him a notice of seven days as per Clause 10.5, sub-clause (b) of Regulations, 2010, so that the he could file objections, if any, against the provisional assessment order - This procedure has not been followed  - Moreover, once the notice is given and objections are invited, a date for final hearing was to be fixed by the respondents - As per Regulation 10.5, sub clause (c), the Assessing Officer has to give opportunity of hearing to the consumer/person in occupation of the premises and has to pass a speaking order thereafter. (177) PLR