The UPPERC (Electricity Regulatory Commission) of the UP (UPERC) gave them a last chance by giving them three months to ensure compliance or face criminal prosecution.
The commission asked Discoms to also submit an interim report on progress in the case by November 15. The commission became furious when Discoms requested more time to comply with the commission’s previous order.
âDespite the categorical submission made by the director, UPPCL, in July 2019, a request is made to provide three additional months even after a delay of more than a year and a half from the date of engagement. It is an extremely worrying situation galore with consumer apathy that even after two years from the date of engagement, the respondents need more time to comply with the instructions, âobserved the bench of three. members led by the president of the UPPERC, RP Singh, in his ordinance of October 27. .
Earlier in the hearing, the UPPCL argued that KESCO was already making the timely payment of interest on the security deposit and informed the commission that four other discoms had also argued that, in accordance with the decision taken at the board meeting, it was decided that the system will be updated over the next few months depending on the connected load and other conditions associated with consumers, but said there was a need more time to update security data.
âThe commission has so far been patient and tolerant with the license holder and thus offers the license holder a last chance before initiating proceedings under section 142 of the 2003 Electricity Act. But it also reminds the holder not to test the patience of the commission or otherwise, it will most certainly attract the anger of the commission â, further noted the commission in its order.
The committee was also concerned that information on a large number of consumers was still not available with the discoms. âThe commission is anguished and irritated that the interest on the security deposit, which has been approved by the commission for so many years as part of the required annual income (ARR), is not credited to consumers’ accounts under the guise of or the other, âobserved the commission.
“Not having information on the security deposit status of a large number of consumers and almost no visible effort to rectify the situation is now not in the zone of monopolistic nonchalant attitude, it is rather criminal for consumers. Even the amount that was credited during the current fiscal year was not provided by MVVNL and PuWNL, âhe added.
Noting that the attitude of the licensee (UPPCL / discoms) was the most insensitive to consumers and in total disregard of the rules / regulations, the commission gave a last chance by granting a period of three months to the discoms to ensure compliance and submit information on the amount of interest on the security deposit paid during the 2021-2022 fiscal year, number of consumers who received interest on the security deposit as well as the number of consumers who did not receive interest on security deposit over the past 10 years and treatment of arrears with respect to interest on security deposits that have not been paid to consumers.
The security deposit is the amount that a consumer must pay to the relevant nightclub when making an electrical connection and the amount is refunded once the consumer permanently renounces the connection. The amount depends on the nature and number of kws (kilowatts) of the connection. Under the rules, discoms must pay interest annually on the security deposit at the going bank rate or above.