Ludhiana: PSPCL told to roll back ₹75L notice to steel unit
According to the complainant, the dispute began when the PSPCL failed to update the steel unit’s revised approved load (contract demand), even after the company repeatedly informed it
The Electricity Ombudsman has slammed the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL) for issuing ₹75.15 lakh bill (demand notice) to a Mandi Gobindgarh-based steel unit — Kisco Castings (India) Limited. The Ombudsman quashed the billing demand for what it described as gross administrative negligence.
In its order dated December 4, the Ombudsman cited that the hefty demand resulted from the PSPCL failing to update the consumer’s revised load request, ignoring multiple letters and allowing internal communication gaps to persist, highlighting the power’s department failure to adhere to basic regulatory requirements.
According to the complainant, the dispute began when the PSPCL failed to update the steel unit’s revised approved load (contract demand), even after the company repeatedly informed it. The unit had formally reduced its planned load from 10,000 kVA to 8,000 kVA and submitted all required forms, processing fees and test reports. Despite this, PSPCL’s records continued to show the higher 10,000 kVA load. This error led to a huge bill for fixed charges on 2,000 kVA of capacity that was never sanctioned, released or used.
The steel plant, which manufactures billets using an induction furnace, had originally applied in March 2022 to increase its sanctioned load from 6,000 kVA to 10,000 kVA. The PSPCL granted feasibility clearance in June 2022, approving the changes in November 2022.
But as business conditions changed, the company revised its requirement in April 2023 and requested that the load be reduced to 8,000 kVA. The unit again submitted all updated forms and test reports. The PSPCL later released the reduced load in February 2024, and for more than a year, the unit was correctly billed based on the 8,000 kVA load.
Despite these submissions and complete procedural compliance, the PSPCL went on to issue a notice in April 2025 demanding additional fixed charges for a period of 14 months on the unreleased 2,000 kVA. The corporation justified this demand by referring to the originally approved 10,000 kVA load, even though the higher capacity had neither been sanctioned nor released, and the consumer had been operating on and billed for the reduced 8,000 kVA load throughout the period.
The Ombudsman found PSPCL’s demand completely baseless, noting that the corporation itself had issued an erroneous load change order and wrongly updated its records, which directly led to the dispute. Referring to Regulations 6.3.3 and 8.5 of the PSERC Supply Code-2014, the Ombudsman stressed that consumers have the right to request a reduction in their sanctioned load. If the power utility fails to act on such a request within 15 days, the reduction is automatically considered approved. In this case, Kisco Castings had followed every procedure correctly, yet the company was penalised solely because of PSPCL’s internal mistakes, the Ombudsman noted.
The Ombudsman has ordered the PSPCL to comply with the decision within 21 days, directing the corporation to immediately withdraw and cancel the disputed bill of ₹75.15 lakh.
