Allahabad High Court
RAMJI SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file a detailed representation before the Executive Engineer, who must decide it within one month.
Summary
The petitioner, a bona‑fide consumer of electricity, alleged that a faulty smart meter generated erroneous bills of Rs. 18,526 for February‑March 2025 and Rs. 1,28,025 for June 2025, despite regular payment of dues. He submitted multiple representations to the electricity department, which were ignored. The respondents argued that the writ petition should not be kept pending and suggested directing the petitioner to approach the Executive Engineer of the electricity board. The High Court, without delving into the merits, disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file a detailed representation with a certified copy of the order to the Executive Engineer within one month, and mandating the respondent to decide the representation within a month of receipt. The order thus provides a procedural remedy rather than adjudicating the substantive billing dispute.
Issues considered
- What procedural direction, if any, can the High Court issue in a consumer writ petition concerning an erroneous electricity bill without deciding the merits?
- Whether the writ petition should be dismissed outright or disposed with an order to file a representation before the concerned utility authority.
Subjects
- Consumer Protection
- Electricity Bill
- Smart Meter
- Writ Petition
- Public Utility
- Representation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 9132 of 2026
Ramji Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Birendra Pandey, Jitendra Pandey,
Prabhakar Tripathi, Vinay Kumar
Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Udit Chandra
Court No. - 40
HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.
HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for
the State-respondents.
2. The petitioner is a bona fide consumer of electricity bearing Consumer
No. 2833230100 with a sanctioned load of 1 KW. The petitioner has been
regularly paying electricity bills and no dues were pending up to 09.01.2025.
3. It is stated that after installation of a faulty smart electricity meter, an
erroneous electricity bill for the months of February and March, 2025
amounting to Rs. 18,526/– was generated, which does not correspond with
the actual consumption. Thereafter, in the month of June, 2025, another
erroneous bill amounting to Rs. 1,28,025/– was raised by the electricity
department. In respect of his grievance, the petitioner has submitted several
representations to the respondent-authority, but no heed has been paid to the
same.
4. Learned Standing Counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served
in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction may be issued
to the respondent No.3 to consider the grievance of the petitioner.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without adverting
into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed off permitting the
petitioner to file a detailed representation alongwith certified copy of this
order before the respondent No.3-Executive Engineer, Purvanchal Vidhut
Vitran Nigam, Ltd. Ghazipur within a period of one month from today. In
WRIC No. 9132 of 2026
2
case, any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent No.3
shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of
one month thereafter from the date he receives the representation.
March 18, 2026
Gaurav
(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
GAURAV PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…