DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ROPAR

                                                          Consumer Complaint No.05 of 2022

                                                                   Date of Decision:  21.04.2023

Yashpal Kaushal aged about 71 years son of Ram Rakha Kaushal ,resident of 147, Phase IB , Shivalik Avenue, Nangal ,Tehsil Nangal, District Rupnagar 

                                                                                      …..Complainant

                                                 Versus

1. The Chairman, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Patiala
2. SDO, Punjab, State Power Corporation Limited, Nangal
3. Punjab Energy Development Agency (PEDA), Sector 33-D, Chandigarh 

…..Opposite Parties

(Complaint under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act)

QUORUM:

                   KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

                   RAMESH KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER

ARGUED BY:

For complainant:            Sh. S.S. Rattan, Advocate

For OP Nos.1 & 2:                  Sh. Manish Dharmani, Advocate

For OP No.3:                 Ms. Dristhana, Advocate  

 ORDER

PER KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant on the averments that the complainant got installed a rooftop solar power plant vide his application No.PEDA2019816141424 dated 16.8.2019, PSPCL Consumer No.3000416967 and accordingly the same was installed by PEDA Plot No.1 & 2, Sector 33D, Chandigarh but the said plant was verified by the OP2. The Government has announced to provide subsides to the tune of 40% upto 3 Kilowat if the solar penal are being installed on the roof of any residential building. The complainant accordingly keeping in view the subsidy, have got installed the said rooftop solar plant on his residential building. The complainant has not received any subsidy till date while approaching the Ops as well as PEDA and finally the complainant tried to get information from PEDA that as and when the subsidy announced by the State Government against the rooftop solar plant will be released in his favour then in reply to the said RTI Peda informed the complainant vide reply dated 29.4.2021 that “the subsides for Grid Connected Rooftop Solar Plants for residential sector will be provided by the State Power Corporation Limited, as per MNRE, GOI new notification dated 8.3.2019 before setting up of plant” and accordingly suggested to pursue the matter against the Ops. The complainant accordingly, visited the office with a request to release the required subsidy to the complainant but of no use. The Ops have unnecessarily lingered on the matter of releasing the subsides in favour of the complainant for the period of more than 2 years and their act and with holding the same with the Ops is highly condemnable, illegal, null and void, malafide, unconstitutional and against the rules of natural justice and equity and accordingly the Ops have made themselves liable to pay Rs.60,000/- along with the damages to the complainant to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of installation of rooftop solar plant. The Ops also liable to pay Rs.30,000/- as litigation expenses. Lastly prayed to allow the complaint.
2. Upon notice, the learned counsel for the Ops No.1 & 2 have filed written reply stating therein that the solar power plant has been installed by PEDA and was verified by the OP2. It is admitted that subsides to the tune of 40% upto 3 KV if the solar penal is being installed on the roof of any residential building and the solar power plant has been fitted on the roof of the complainant. PEDA is fully responsible for the release of subsides. As per the ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Govt. of India vide its letter No.318/41/2019 dated 29.5.2019 has intimated that Cabinet Committee on economic affairs has approved the Phase II of Grid Connected Rooftop Solar Programme and the scheme has been proposed to be implement through the Electricity Distribution Company i.e. PSPCL and in this regard, MNRE issued operational guidelines for implementation of the Phase II of Grid Connected Rooftop Solar Programme vide its letter dated 20.8.2019. Subsequently, MNRE vide its letter dated 4.10.2019 allocated 30 MW rooftop solar capacity to PSPCL for the installation of Solar Rooftop system under Phase II of Grid Connected Rooftop Solar Programme and the time line for completion of project was 15 months from the date of allocation of 30 MW capacity to PSPCL i.e. from 4.10.2019 to 3.10.2021. The relevant date of installation of Yashpal Kaushal is dated 8.9.2019 which is prior to 2019 and PEDA is fully responsible for issuance of subsides on his behalf. As per clause of 5.1.6 of operational guidelines, the implementing agency i.e. PSPCL or its authority agency have to invite expression of interest for empanelment of agency for supply, installation, testing and commissioning of rooftop solar system in residential premises. To ensure quality and post installation services only manufactures of solar penal and system integrator, fulfilling predetermined technical and financial criteria would be allowed to participate in the bidding process. As per clause 5.1.7 of operation guidelines issued by MNRE on 20.8.2019 the then officiary will be option of installing RTS system through any of these empanelled vendors at Net of CFA (Central Financial Assistance) amount i.e. making payment to the vendors after deducting the eligible CFA amount. The vendor will claim the CFA from the implementing agency. In compliance, PSPCL had floated tender enquiry No.23 /IPC/RTS/2019-2020 on 15.10.2019 for discovering rates and empanelment of vendors. Subsequently, PSPCL issued office order dated 20.2.2020 for the discovered rates and empanelled 247 No.EPC company manufacturers, suppliers and system integrators of solar PV power projects for installation of Grid Connection Rooftop SPV Power Plants in the State of Punjab Under Phase II Programme and it is clear that MNRE has authorised PSPCL for release of subsides to the rooftop solar plant registered against allocated capacity of 30 MW under Phase II of programme and PSPCL has started registration of applications at Solar Project of PSPCL only after 20.2.2020 i.e. after the empanelment of vendors and discovery of rates through the tendering process. So, it is clear that the consumers have applied/registered for solar power plant under PEDA dated 16.8.2019. So consumer have to take up with PEDA for release of subsides as PSPCL has started to release the subsides of registered consumer on PSPCL Portal only after 20.2.2020. Rest of allegations have been made by the complainant against the answering Ops are denied and prayed for dismissal the present complaint against the answering Ops.
3. After impleading the party as OP3, notice was issued to the OP3 and learned counsel for OP3 has appeared and filed its written reply on behalf of OP3 and taking preliminary objections; that the complaint filed by the complainant is bad in law; that the complaint filed by the complainant is based on conjectures and surmises; that the complaint filed by the complainant qua the answering OP is baseless without there being any cogent reasoning to the same; that the complainant is estopped from filing this complaint by his own acts and conduct; that the complainant has not approached this Hon’ble Commission with clean hands and concealed the material truth; that the complainant has wrongly invoked the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Commission by way of the instant complaint, wherein, the complainant has presented false/frivolous/twisted facts; that as per the settled cannons of law a person, who does not come to the Court with clean hands and he is not entitled to be heard on the merits of his grievances and in any case, such person is not entitled to any relief as applicable not only to the petitions filed under Article 32, 226 and 136 of the Constitution of but also to the cases instituted in other courts and judicial forums; that in fact no liability, whatsoever, can be attributed towards the answering Ops as the complainant himself is at fault and as such there is no privity of contract between the complainant and the answering Ops. On merits, it is stated that the Government of India through Ministry of New and Renewable Energy had launched Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission during 2010-11, which is a major initiative of the Government of India and State Government to promote Ecologically sustainable growth while addressing India energy security challenge and also as a major contribution by the India to the global effort to meet the challenges of climate change. Accordingly, in the year 2014, a scheme by the name of Off-Grid and Decentralized Solar Applications floated by Ministry of New and Renewable Energy during the 12^th Five year plant and subsequently, under the ibid scheme, operational/necessary guidelines for the implementation of Grid Connected rooftop and small solar power plant programme were issued by the MNRE. Further, the central financial assistance/susbsidy had been scaled at 30 percent of benchmark cost of the grid connected solar rooftop and small solar power plants programme, which is to be paid exclusively by MNRE.  It would be sufficient to state that subsequently, GOI through MNRE, had scaled up the budget for the implementation of the ibid grid connected solar rooftop and small solar power plants programme from earlier Rs.600 Crore to Rs.5000 crore, vide notification dated 4.3.2016. The answering OP PEDA while functioning under the aegis of Dept. of New and Renewable Energy, Govt. of Punjab being the State Nodal Agency in Punjab. Like all the other Nodal Agencies in the entire country, MNRE GOI, for implementation of grid connected solar rooftop and small solar power plants programme in State of Punjab had appointed PEDA as the implementing Agency, however, it is a matter of fact that entire CFDA was to be paid by MNRE, GOI being the author of the scheme. MNRE from time to time as per the prevailing requirement/circumstance had been changing the specification/scheme with regard to Net Metering. At present, the implementation of the grid connected solar PV project under the Net Meeting has been transferred to the Distribution Companies in the Entire country by the MNRE and accordingly the programme is not being handled by PSPCL. The answering OP till 2019 every year through e tendering invited applications qua empanelment from the manufactures/ system integrators/bidders for rooftop grid connected SPV in Punjab for capacity 1 KWP upto 500 KWP for maintain a proper system for the implementation of the MNRE scheme, in terms thereof. It is mandatory for the beneficiaries to get the plants installed from the empanelled vendors having through technical know how of the MNRE scheme. The beneficiaries who fulfil the criteria stipulated in the MNRE scheme are paid subsidy @ 30% subject to availability of the funds from MNRE GOI on the basis of MNRE benchmark price/approved rates or actual cost of the project which ever is lower, after getting the project commissioned at their premises. After the installation and commissioning of SPV Power Plant, the plant is visited by PEDA officials along with plant installer to verify that plant is installed as per specifications. Thereafter, the verification report i.e. joint commissioning report is forwarded by PEDA to MNRE GOI for release of subsidy and after scrutinization of the case by MNRE, the same is released by MNRE through PEDA. The complainant had applied for setting up of 3 KW rooftop Solar Power Plant under the Net Meeting Policy at the residence of the complainant, without their being any privity of contract with the answering OP in this regard. While applying for the above mentioned project, the complainant had been duly informed that sanction of subsidy was to be taken from PSPCL. PEDA has no role to play in the grant of sanction of subsidy.  Rest of allegations made by the complainant has been denied by the answering OP and prayed for dismissal the present complaint against the answering OP. 
4.  In order to prove the case, the learned counsel for the parties have placed on record the affidavits and certain documents in the shape of evidence and have closed their evidence, respectively.  
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the complaint file along with documents, written arguments filed by the complainant and Ops No.1 to 3 very minutely.
6. It is admitted fact that the complainant had installed the solar plant at the rooftop of his residential area.It is also admitted that the complainant purchased the solar system for a sum of Rs.60,000/-. The grudge of the complainant is that after his repeated requests, the Ops have failed to return/pay back the subsidy of Rs.60,000/- to be given by the Government and after the installation of the solar system. The complainant has placed on record Ex.A10, i.e. approval for installation of rooftop solar power plant under Net Meeting dated 16.10.2019. As discussed above, all these facts have been admitted and proved by the complainant.
7. The complainant has not alleged anywhere that the performance of the solar system is not proper or there is any manufacturing defect nor there is any allegation against the Ops. OP3 is the govt. department of PEDA. This department registered the solar system in their system and is being represented by the official of the department. Ex.A10 is the document showing the subject approval for installation of rooftop solar power plant under Net Meeting and this shows that the plant of the complainant has been approved. In the present complaint, the learned counsel for the complainant has placed on record Ex.A11, i.e. Loom Solar and in which it is clearly stated that Central Financial Assistance (CFA)/Subsidy for Grid Connected Rooftop Solar Plants under the Net Meeting will be provided by the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited from capacity 1 to 10 Kw as per MNRE GOI new notification dated 08.03.2019 whereas in its reply the Ops No.1 & 2 also taken a plea that the relevant date of installation of complainant is dated 8.9.2019 which is prior to 2019 and PEDA is fully responsible for issuance of subsidies on his behalf. The PSPCL had floated tender enquiry No.23/IPC/RTS/2019-2020 on 15.10.2019 for discovering rates and empanelment of vendors. Subsequently, PSPCL issued office order dated 20.02.2020 for the discovered rates and empanelled 247 No.EPC company manufactures, suppliers and system integrators of solar PV power projects for installation of grid connection rooftop SPV power Plants in the state of Punjab under Phase II programme and it is clear that MNRE has authorised PSPCL for release of subsides to the rooftop solar plant registered against allocated capacity of 30 KW under Phase II programme and PSPCL has started registration of applications at solar project of PSPCL only after 20.2.2020 i.e. after the empanelment of vendors and discovery of rates through the tendering process. So, it is clear that the consumers have applied/registered for solar plant under PEDA on 16.8.2019. PSPCL released the subsidies on PSPCL portal only after 20.2.2020 and Ops No.2 & 3 are not responsible for giving any subsidies to the complainant. Now the question arises is that whether the PEDA is responsible for giving the subsidies to the complainant. In reply, the OP No.3 has stated that the complainant had applied for setting up of 3 KW rooftop solar power plant under Net Meeting policy at the residence of the complainant without their being any privity of contract with the OP3 in this regard. While applying for the above mentioned project, the complainant had been duly informed that sanction of subsidy was to be taken from OP1. So, PEDA has no role to play in the grant of subsidy as per annexure R4.
8. In view of our above discussion, we feel, that the complainant has failed to show any document where the Ops No.1 to 3 promise to pay/return back the subsidy amount.  Therefore, the complaint of the complainant stands dismissed. Free certified copies be sent to the parties, as per rules. The file be indexed & consigned to the record room.
9.  

(Ramesh Kumar Gupta)(Kuljit Singh)

Member President