DERC slaps Rs 20k fine on BRPL

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, June 24

The Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) has slapped a Rs 20,000 penalty on a distribution company for “violation” of rules in a 10-year-old case of power theft.

Delhi’s power regulator imposed the penalty on BSES Rajdhani Power Limited (BRPL) on a petition filed by director of AK Mehta and Company, alleging violations of provisions of the Delhi Electricity Supply Code and Performance Standards Regulations, 2007.

The commission in its order on June 14 stated that respondent BRPL violated provisions of Regulations 52 (viii) and 53 (ii) of the Delhi Electricity Supply Code and Performance Standards Regulations, 2007, and directed it to pay a fine within 30 days of the order. 

In a case of dishonest abstraction of energy, a power meter of the petitioner was sent to the National Accreditation Board for testing and he was informed through a letter of respondent dated December 10, 2008.

As per the order, the respondent failed to produce evidence of seizure memo of the date of removal of meter. The meter was removed on December 10, 2008. Hence, the respondent violated the Regulations 52 (viii) of the Delhi Electricity Supply Code and the Performance Standards Regulations, 2007, the order stated.

Regulation 52 (viii) of the Supply Code, 2007, says that in case of suspected theft of power, the authorised officer will remove the old meter under a seizure memo and seal it in the presence of the consumer or his representative.

The order also found violation of Regulation 53 (ii) of the Supply Code, 2007, according to which after personal hearing, the licensee (discom) is supposed to pass within three days a speaking order on whether or not the case of theft is established. 

However, the personal hearing was held on October 6, 2009, and the speaking order was issued on December 4, 2009, after one month and 28 days from the date of personal hearing, pointed out the DERC. 

The commission did not buy the arguments of the respondent over the stipulated time of passing the speaking order not being a mandatory provision and observed that the regulation must be complied with irrespective of it being mandatory or a directory direction. 

It cannot be the free will of the discom to comply or not to comply with the provisions of regulations and omission on its part is a violation of the set rules, noted the commission. 

Respondent failed to produce evidence 

• In a case of dishonest abstraction of energy, a power meter of the petitioner was sent to the National Accreditation Board for testing and he was informed through a letter of respondent dated December 10, 2008.
• As per the order, the respondent failed to produce evidence of seizure memo of the date of removal of meter.
• The meter was removed on December 10, 2008. Hence, the respondent violated the Regulations 52 (viii) of the Delhi Electricity Supply Code and the Performance Standards Regulations, 2007, the order stated.