Haryana Electricity Commission Cracks Down on Gurgaon Housing Society Over Billing Violations
The Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission (HERC) has issued a stern directive to the resident welfare association (RWA) of Uniworld Gardens II in Gurgaon and the developer Unitech Realty Pvt Ltd, mandating strict adherence to electricity billing regulations and ordering the refund of excess money collected from residents. This decisive action follows a petition filed by a local resident, highlighting systemic irregularities in power billing practices.
Penalties and Compliance Deadlines Imposed
In its ruling, HERC imposed an immediate penalty of Rs 50,000 on the RWA and set a 30-day compliance deadline. The commission warned that failure to follow the order would result in an additional penalty of Rs 6,000 per day for continued violation. Furthermore, the panel explicitly barred Unitech from using a Supreme Court moratorium as a shield to avoid compliance with electricity billing rules, emphasizing that regulatory obligations cannot be circumvented.
Background of the Dispute
The case originated from a petition filed by Gurgaon resident Naresh Kumar Jindal under sections 142 and 146 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Jindal alleged that the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) order dated September 2, 2022, had been ignored by both the RWA and the developer. The dispute centers on electricity billing in Uniworld Gardens II, where power is supplied through the single point supply system by Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (DHBVN).
According to the complaint, residents were subjected to arbitrary increases in electricity bills that deviated from HERC's Single Point Supply Regulations, 2020. Specifically, the builder charged approximately Rs 6.1 per unit, while DHBVN billed the bulk supply at Rs 5.25 per unit. This discrepancy resulted in residents paying more than the tariff intended for domestic consumers.
Additional Charges and Financial Irregularities
The petitioner also raised objections to several ancillary charges, including a daily standing charge of Rs 139 and fixed charges related to prepaid meter operations, which were deemed inconsistent with tariff regulations. More alarmingly, Jindal alleged that the developer collected connection charges totaling Rs 58,683 and retained around Rs 60 lakh that should have been refunded to residents, pointing to significant financial mismanagement.
Historical Context and Legal Arguments
In 2020, the CGRF ruled that electricity bills should be recalculated using the telescopic tariff applicable to individual consumers and ordered the refund of excess money collected. When the resident approached HERC in 2023 seeking enforcement of this order, Unitech attempted to halt proceedings by citing a moratorium imposed by the Supreme Court in the case of Bhupinder Singh vs Unitech Ltd. This case involved the court taking control of the company through a new board to protect homebuyers' interests, with a January 20, 2020, order imposing a moratorium on starting proceedings against Unitech and its subsidiaries.
However, the petitioner successfully argued that the moratorium was being misinterpreted and could not justify illegal electricity billing practices. He maintained that compliance with tariff regulations remains mandatory, regardless of corporate restructuring or legal protections.
Broader Implications for Consumer Rights
This ruling underscores the critical role of regulatory bodies in safeguarding consumer rights against exploitative practices in real estate and utility management. It sets a precedent for holding developers and RWAs accountable for transparent and lawful billing, particularly in housing societies with single-point supply systems. The commission's firm stance against using legal technicalities to evade responsibilities sends a clear message to other entities engaging in similar violations.
As Gurgaon continues to urbanize rapidly, such interventions are essential to ensure that residents are not burdened with unjustified costs and that developers adhere to established norms. The case also highlights the importance of vigilant citizens like Naresh Kumar Jindal, whose efforts have brought systemic issues to light and prompted corrective action.
