JVVNL, Jaipur. vs Mandir Shri Govind Dev Ji Maharaj, Jai Nivash Garden,

Judgment

2. Mandir Shri Govind Dev Ji Maharaj, Jai Nivash Garden, District - Jaipur (Raj.) Pincode - 302002, Through Shebait/trustee Of Mandir Shri Govind Dev Ji Maharaj, Jai Nivash Garden, District Jaipur (Raj.) Pincode - 302002 Electricity Ombudsman Rajasthan, Jaipur, Vidyut Viniyamak Bhawan, Sahakar Marg, Near State Motor Garage, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ishan Kumawat For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 16/09/2025

1. The present petition is filed with the following prayer: - By way of an appropriate writ, order or direction, "i) the impugned order dated 03.02.2025 passed by the learned Electricity Ombudsman Rajasthan, Jaipur in Case No. EOR-680/2024 titled as Mandir Shri Govind Dev Ji Maharaj Vs. the Zonal Chief Engineer (Jaipur Zone), Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., whereby, the learned Electricity Ombudsman allowed the complaint filed by the complainant, respondent No. 1 herein, may kindly be quashed and set aside. ii. Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be passed in favour of the humble petitioner. iii. to the petitioner." Cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner JVVNL is a distribution licensee under Electricity Act, [2025:RJ-JP:37821] (2 of 6) [CW-8986/2025]

2003. It is further submitted that the respondent No.1 has an electricity connection having contract demand of 49 KVA w.e.f.,

28.11.2024 under the jurisdiction of AEN (E-1), JVVNL, Jaipur.

3. Further, it is submitted that the respondent No.1 allegedly aggrieved with the wrong charging of the transformer losses @ 3 percent and not allowing the rebate of 7.5 percent on the energy charges w.e.f., 28.11.2024. Thereafter, respondent No.1 approached the concerned Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum for redressal of the grievance, stating that the respondent No.1 should get a rebate of 7.5 percent in its electricity bills for the reason that its electricity connection is HT in nature. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that tariff code of the complainant is charged to 2010JN in the month of November, 2024 and contract demand for electricity connection of the complainant is also charged to 49 KVA from 26.11.2024.

4. Additionally, it is submitted that the learned Consumer Forum after providing audience to the respective parties vide order dated 10.12.2024 directed that the complainant shall get the said rebate from the subsequent electricity bills and further observed that the remaining grievance of the complainant is already resolved.

5. Subsequently, respondent No.1 being aggrieved of the order dated 10.12.2024 filed a complaint before the Electricity Ombudsman Rajasthan, Jaipur, wherein, respondent No.1 reiterated its grievances and prayed that the supply of voltage or character of service connected load above 5 KW and the contract demand upto 50 KVA is LT three phase. [2025:RJ-JP:37821] (3 of 6) [CW-8986/2025]

6. Further, it is submitted that in reply to the said petitioner filed a reply averring that the complainant who is sanctioned a load of 48 KW has approached the Consumer Forum for redressal of its grievance and in compliance with the directions passed passed by learned Consumer Forum, petitioner issued the amended bill for the month of December, 2024. Further, it is submitted that there is no change in the consumption of electricity, therefore, the respondent No.1/ complainant is not entitle to any relief.

7. Further, it is submitted that learned Electricity Ombudsman after providing audience to the respective parties vide order dated 03.02.2025 allowed the complaint filed by the respondent No.1 by allowing the rebate of 7.5 percent and allowed the refund of the application fee and refunded Rs. 100/-. Being aggrieved of the said order, the present petition is filed, alleging that the said order is not a reasoned order.

8. Having heard and considered the arguments made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the impugned order dated 03.02.2025 passed by learned Ombudsman, this Court has made the following observations:-

8.1 That Electricity Ombudsman is an authority appointed or designated by the Commission under Section 42(6) of the Electricity Act, 2003. The purpose of Ombudsman is to provide an impartial forum in order to resolve consumer grievances against electricity services. Further, the award passed by the learned Ombudsman shall be complied with by the licensee within the stipulated period and compliance of the same shall be communicated to the Electricity Ombudsman, otherwise it shall be [2025:RJ-JP:37821] (4 of 6) [CW-8986/2025] deemed to be a contravention of the provisions of Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission (Settlement of Disputes by Electricity Ombudsman) Regulations, 2010.

8.2 That as per Regulation 4.40 of the notification No. RERC/ Secy. /Reg. 143 (Øekad% fo-yks-jkt-@fu-l-@i=k- 101@isz- 68) issued by Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission on 05.04.2021, orders of the learned Ombudsman shall be final and binding on the parties. Relevant portion of the same is reproduced herein under:- "4.35 The order passed by the Ombudsman shall set out: a) issues arising from the proceedings before it; b) issue- wise decision; c) reasons for passing the order; d) directions, if any, to the Distribution Licensee or Complainant or any other order, deemed appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.

4.40 The orders of the Ombudsman shall be final and binding on the parties. No party can file an appeal before the Commission against the order. However, the rights of Complainant and Licensee to file an appeal before the judicial bodies shall remain protected. The filing of an appeal shall not tantamount to stay on the order of the Ombudsman unless such stay is specifically granted.

4.41 In the event of non-compliance / non- implementation of any order passed by the Ombudsman by licensee, the consumer may approach the Commission for the enforcement of the order within a period of 30 days of the passing of the order or from the expiry of the time granted for the implementation of the order by the Ombudsman, whichever is later. The Commission may issue any order (including an order imposing fines and penalties on the Licensees, as provided for under the Act and under these regulations) or take any other steps, as it deems appropriate for the enforcement of the order. [2025:RJ-JP:37821] (5 of 6) [CW-8986/2025]

4.42 The Ombudsman shall be guided by such factors which in the opinion of the Ombudsman are necessary in the interest of justice and shall ensure transparency while exercising its powers and discharging its functions in compliance with the principles of natural justice: Provided that the Ombudsman shall not be bound by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) or the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872) as in force from time to time."

8.3 That in the instant matter learned Ombudsman allowed the rebate as per the provisions contained in the Tariff for Supply Electricity- 2024 of the Tariff Schedule.

8.4 That category of the complainant was changed from Tariff Schedule NDS/ HT-2 to NDS/LT-2.

8.5 That orders passed by the learned Ombudsman shall be complied with within a period of 30 days of the issue of the order.

8.6

8.7 That the complainant is acting as a compulsive litigant. The relevant portion of the impugned order 03.02.2025 is reiterated herein below:- "(a) The contact demand of the complainant was reduced from 53.85 KVA to/49 KVA vide JIR no. 416/44 dated 28.11.2024. (b) With the reduction in CD, the category of the complainant stands changed from Tariff Schedule NDS/HT-2 to NDS/LT-2. This means that character of service of the complainant prior to 28.11.2024 was (HT) 11 KV. (c) Relevant provisions contained in note (viii) of the "Tariff for Supply of Electricity-2024" issued vide order no. JPR5-1170 dated 13.08.2024 under Tariff Schedule, is reproduced as below:- (II) NON-DOMESTIC SERVICE (Schedule NDS/LT-2) "If a Consumer under this schedule is provided High Tension Supply However, JAIPUR Discom may at its discretion, provide metering equipment on Low Voltage side of consumer's transformer and in such cases 3% (three percent) of recorded consumption [2025:RJ-JP:37821] (6 of 6) [CW-8986/2025] shall be added to cover transformation losses, thereafter rebate @ 7.5% on Energy Charges be allowed." (d) There is no condition in the above provision at Para 6(A)(c) that in case of Electrification the above rebate @ 7.5% is not admissible. Therefore in view of above, the present category of the complainant is NDS/LT-2 (Tariff Code 2000JN) with supply on 11 KV metering of LT side, but 11 KV supply remained unchanged even after 28.11.2024."

9. Additionally, as per settled position of law, unless the order suffers from malafides, or passed without jurisdiction, or is perverse, or if there is any violation of fundamental rights, the Court cannot exercise its powers under writ jurisdiction.

10. Taking note of the aforementioned, it is noted that learned Ombudsman in the instant matter has passed an award in a speaking manner after providing due opportunity of hearing to the respective parties and considering the material available on record, therefore, this Court is of the view that order involves no malafides, thus, there is no reason to interfere with the present petition. Howsoever, it is made clear that instant matter has peculiar factual matrix, therefore, the judgment passed herein shall not be treated as a precedence.

11. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. Pooja /16 (SAMEER JAIN),J