The Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission (CSERC) has disposed of a petition filed by M/s Fortune Metaliks Limited against the Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited (CSPDCL), concerning a security deposit demand of nearly ₹30 crore and the applicability of pre-payment meters for high-tension (HT) electricity consumers. The Commission allowed the existing installment arrangement to continue but declined to direct the immediate installation of pre-payment smart meters.
The case, registered as Petition No. 31 of 2026, involved Fortune Metaliks Limited, a manufacturing company operating a TMT and structural components plant at Village Kapsada in Raipur, Chhattisgarh. The facility has a contract demand of 40 MVA and receives electricity supply at 132 kV.
The dispute arose after CSPDCL demanded a substantial security deposit and an additional security deposit from the company. Considering the financial burden of paying the amount at once, Fortune Metaliks requested permission to pay the dues in installments. The distribution company subsequently permitted the company to clear the amount in 10 monthly installments.
However, the company also sought exemption from furnishing the security deposit by invoking Section 47(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003. The provision states that consumers using pre-payment meters are not required to provide security for electricity supply. Based on this provision and judgments delivered by various High Courts, the petitioner requested the Commission to direct CSPDCL to install a pre-payment meter immediately.
Alternatively, Fortune Metaliks proposed paying estimated monthly electricity charges in advance, with the existing security deposits refunded or adjusted accordingly.
CSPDCL opposed the petition, arguing that the matter should be addressed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum under Section 42 of the Electricity Act. The utility maintained that the additional security deposit had been calculated according to applicable rules and annual consumption reviews.
The distribution company also highlighted technical and regulatory challenges associated with installing pre-payment smart meters for HT consumers. Such installations involve specialised Current Transformer (CT) and Potential Transformer (PT) arrangements. CSPDCL stated that a committee had already been established to examine the feasibility of introducing pre-payment facilities for these consumers.
After hearing both parties, CSERC held that the petition was maintainable because it involved interpreting Section 47(5) and regulatory issues beyond the consumer forum’s jurisdiction.
However, the Commission declined to order immediate pre-payment meter installation or permit the proposed advance-payment adjustment. It observed that introducing such systems for HT consumers would require detailed technical examination, stakeholder consultations and appropriate amendments to the Chhattisgarh State Electricity Supply Code.
The Commission directed Fortune Metaliks to continue paying the security deposit under the agreed 10-month installment arrangement. CSPDCL was instructed to maintain uninterrupted electricity supply as long as the company complied with the payment schedule. The petition was subsequently disposed of.
Discover more from SolarQuarter
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
