JUSTICE J. M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL) 1. The duty of the Government is to create policies in favour of the citizens and not to harass the citizens unnecessarily. 2. In this case, the complainant was getting electricity from City Feeder. He had paid a sum of Rs.28,170/- on 23.3.1998. All of a sudden, the opposite party, UHBVNL passed a notification on 1.6.2010 regarding shifting and release of DS/NDS, LT and HT Industrial connection and clarified the matter in respect of circular dated 13.5.2010, which is already mentioned in the order of the State Commission. 3. It is surprising to note that the circular dated 13.5.2010 was not produced on record. The clarification mentions as follows: “The matter has been considered and clarified that: In this connection it is clarified that all the agriculture connections be released from AP feeder and the connections of Ind/DS/NDS/Dera/Dhanies may be released from the 11KV rural DS feeder irrespective of the fact that some other feeder is near to the feeders. Matter has already been clarified vide this office memo no. Ch.49/SS-403/SEG/GM/C/C-1 dated 18.09.2009 and again intimated vide this office
memo no. Ch.17/SS-403/SEG/GM/C/C-1 dated 28.4.2010. It is for your information and necessary action please.” 4. It is interesting to note that Shri S. K. Dhull, S.D.O. (OP) UHBVN Ltd., has filed an affidavit before the District Forum wherein in para 3 it is stated that : “That the officials of the defendant Nigam in advertantly also shifted the domestic connections of the complainants from City Feeder to Rural Feeder whereas the direction vide letter dated 03.06.2010 is only with regard to transfer of tubewell connections from city feeder to Rural Feeder. 5. This is an admitted fact that the complainant is getting electricity in respect of tubewell from Rural Feeder. There is no dispute about it. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the similarly situated persons are\ getting the electricity from rural feeder and this is an exceptional case and in case, the complainant gets electricity from Rural Feeder than City Feeder, he will pay the less and get more electricity. This argument lacks conviction. 7. The revision petition has no merits, therefore, the same is dismissed accordingly. | 
