Thane, Jan 07: The Principal District Court of the Thane Sessions Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC), upholding a trial court order that had quashed and set aside water bills worth over Rs 73.7 lakh issued to M/s Oceana Textile Mills Pvt Ltd, a Navi Mumbai–based industrial unit. The court held that the bills were issued arbitrarily and in violation of the Water Supply Regulations, 1973.
Dispute dates back to 2001
The appeal arose from a long-running dispute dating back to 2001, when MIDC issued revised water bills of Rs 65.69 lakh for the period between June 2000 and May 2001 and an additional Rs 8.06 lakh for June–July 2001, alleging excessive water consumption due to a supposedly tampered water meter.
Mandatory procedure under regulations not followed
However, the court noted that MIDC failed to follow the mandatory procedure under Clause 23 of the Water Supply Regulations, which requires the Executive Engineer to get the meter tested at a certified laboratory before revising bills retrospectively. The court observed that no such testing report was produced and no show-cause notice was issued to the company before raising the disputed bills.
Court questions arbitrary billing
“The appellant corporation has not followed the mandate of the Water Supply Regulations,” the court maintained, thereby showing that regular water bills for the same period had earlier been issued and paid based on actual meter readings without any objection from MIDC.
Officials not examined, no proof of tampering
The court further took note that the MIDC officials who allegedly detected the tampering were not examined as witnesses, and the officials who testified admitted they had no personal knowledge of the alleged inspection or any proof of meter manipulation.
“It is absolutely unclear as to when and how the appellants (MIDC) came to the conclusion that the meter was running slow or, for that matter, it was tampered, and no procedure prescribed under the Regulations seems to have been followed,” the order copy reads.
No show-cause notice issued, says court
Pointing to the MIDC engineer’s witness statement, which denied issuing a show-cause notice to the company, the order copy reads: “He (engineer) has specifically admitted that no action as per Clause 23 of the Water Supply Regulations, 1973, was taken by the appellants (MIDC), nor any show-cause notice was issued to the company in that regard after noticing that the meter was tampered. In fact, even the suit bill does not mention the remark regarding tampering and, as stated earlier, the only remark was ‘the meter was replaced on 10/6/2001’.”
Consumer’s right to legal remedy upheld
Rejecting MIDC’s argument that the company should have first paid the disputed amount under protest before approaching the court, the judge ruled that such a clause could not override a consumer’s right to seek legal remedy, especially when statutory procedures were not followed by the authority itself.
Also Watch:
Recovery barred, water supply protected
Dismissing the appeal, the court upheld the earlier decree restraining MIDC from recovering the disputed amount or disconnecting the water supply to the textile unit.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
