DELHI ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Viniyamak Bhawan, „C‟ Block, Shivalik, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi – 110 017
Ref. F.11(598)/DERC/2010-11/C.F.No. 2581/6436
Petition No. 75/2010 In the matter of:
Complaint under Section 142 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
In the matter of : Ms. Gargi Mukherjee B-2/2312, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110 070
BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. Through its: CEO BSES Bhawan, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110 019. Sh. P.D. Sudhakar, Chairperson, Sh. Shyam Wadhera, Member & Sh .J.P. Singh, Member.
1. Sh. Sudip Bhattacharya, Sr. Manager, BRPL; 2. Sh. Parmod Kr. Gupta, Asstt. Manager, Legal, BRPL; 3. Ms. Gargi Mukherjee – Complainant; 4. Ms. Nirmala, Advocate – Complainant.
The above matter was listed for hearing today in the Commission;
where above named representatives of both the parties were present.
In the course of hearing, the counsel of the complainant submitted that
the Respondent is not installing electricity meter even after payment of
settled amount, in pursuance of the order of the Delhi High Court Legal
Services Committee Lok Adalat made vide No. DHCLSC/10/SPL LOK
ADALAT/ Dated 13-14/02/2010. Vide this order, it was decided that the
consumer shall pay a total sum of Rs. 75,000/- towards ful and final
settlement of the impugned bil s and the above amount shall be paid
in three instalments of Rs. 25,000/- each. The first instalment shal be
paid by 25.02.2010 and remaining amount up to March, 2010. It was
further decided, that the petitioner shal apply for new connection
after making payment of first instalment.
The Complainant further submitted that the Respondent failed to instal
the new connection at her premises inspite of her depositing the entire
settled amount as per the order of the Lok Adalat. In reply to the
above inaction of the Respondent for not giving a new connection as
per direction of the Lok Adalat, the representative of the Respondent
took the plea that the petitioner has failed to complete the
commercial formalities, which Include payment of pending dues on
the old connection as well as applicable charges including security
deposit for providing new connection. The Respondent also stated
that the Lok Adalat directions were not binding on the DISCOM.
The counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of the Commission to
order dated 20.02.2010 of the Permanent Lok Adalat-II, wherein the
“The petitioner has already made a payment of Rs.50,000/- on 05.11.2009 against this outstanding demand it appears that on reconciliation of the arrears as per the consumption recorded by the meter the outstanding demand may not be even Rs. 80,000/-. In view of these circumstances, supply of the Petitioner wil be restored through new meter within 3 working days of the petitioner making on payment of the settled amount of Rs. 75,000/- and on competition of commercial formalities. The relevant record comprising of consumption chart and payment details shal be brought by the department on 20.03.2010. The case is adjourned to 20.03.2010”
The Commission observes that the matter regarding settlement of dues
payable by the Petitioner to the Respondent Company is already
before Senior Civil Judge Saket in Civil Suit No. 302/2010. While the
above matter is under adjudication of the Civil Court, the Order dated
20.02.2010 of the Permanent Lok Adalat-II that “supply of the Petitioner
wil be restored through new meter within 3 working days of the
Petitioner making on payment of the settled amount of Rs.75,000/- and
on completion of commercial formalities” remains uncomplied. Further
more, as per Section 21 of the Legal Services Authority Act 1987, every
award of the Lok Adalat shal be final and binding on al the parties of
the dispute and no appeal shal be lie any court against the award.
Pending completion of the proceedings in the Civil Court, the
Commission directs the Respondent to ensure that the electricity
connection of the Petitioner is restored within 7 days of the order after
completing the commercial formalities of payment of reconnection
charges and security deposit but excluding other dues which are under
adjudication before the Civil Court. The Commission shall review the
The matter shall now be listed for hearing on 13th March, 2012.
(J. P. Singh) (Shyam Wadhera) (P. D. Sudhakar)
Recent article on need for behavior change, not condoms. AIDS in Africa--a Betrayal The one success story is now threatened by U.S. aid bureaucrats. by Edward C. Green The Weekly Standard 01/31/2005, Volume 010, Issue 19 FOR MANY YEARS, THERE was an open secret in the battle against AIDS in Africa. A few of us knew about, and earnestly sought to publicize, crucial findings indicating the most
Prescribing Information Pr ERYTHROCIN® I.V. (erythromycin lactobionate for injection ) Submission Control Number: 129342 PRESCRIBING INFORMATION NAME OF DRUG Pr ERYTHROCIN® I.V. (erythromycin lactobionate for injection) THERAPEUTIC CLASSIFICATION ACTION AND CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY Erythromycin exerts its antibacterial action by binding to the 50S ribosomal subuni