The Karnataka High Court ruled that KPTCL cannot unilaterally revise supervision charges payable by consumers for self-executed electrical works. The court quashed a demand notice of ₹1.2 crore issued to Anushka Realty, emphasizing that any charge revision requires approval from the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC).
KPTCL Can't Unilaterally Change Supervision Charges
The Karnataka High Court has made a significant ruling regarding the powers of the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL). The Court held that KPTCL does not possess the authority to unilaterally revise supervision charges payable by consumers engaged in self-executed electrical works.
Justice Ravi V Hosmani, who presided over the case, noted that any revisions to these supervision charges must be sanctioned by the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC). This decision stems from a dispute involving a demand notice issued by KPTCL to Anushka Realty Inc. for a sum of ₹1.2 crore, which the court has subsequently quashed.
The ruling emphasizes the regulatory framework surrounding electricity distribution and consumer rights in Karnataka. The Court's emphasis on KERC's oversight reflects an effort to uphold consumer protection and ensure that arbitrary pricing adjustments do not occur without due process.
For practitioners, this ruling underscores the importance of regulatory compliance for utility companies and reinforces the need for authority before any charge adjustments. The implications may also extend to similar cases where consumer charges are disputed, ensuring higher scrutiny over utility practices.
Citations
- Anushka Realty Inc v State of Karnataka (2026) KB 1
