Panchkula, June 9, 2026: The Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission (HERC) has allowed a review petition filed by Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (DHBVNL), permitting the utility to continue levying fixed charges on a pro-rata basis linked to billing days, while ensuring that the total annual recovery does not exceed the fixed charges payable under the applicable tariff schedule.
The review petition arose from HERC's earlier order dated 24.05.2024 passed in Petition No. 23 of 2023, wherein the Commission had directed DHBVNL to levy fixed charges strictly on a monthly basis and make corresponding changes in its billing software.
Background
The dispute originated from a consumer grievance concerning the methodology adopted by DHBVNL for recovery of fixed charges. The consumer had challenged the utility's practice of calculating fixed charges through a formula based on the number of billing days instead of charging fixed amounts on a calendar-month basis.
In its earlier order, the Commission had directed DHBVNL to modify its billing mechanism and recover fixed charges on a monthly basis. Aggrieved by the operational implications of the direction, DHBVNL approached the Commission seeking review and clarification.
DHBVNL's Contentions
DHBVNL submitted that its billing software calculates fixed charges using the formula:
(Fixed Charge Rate × Billing Days × 12) ÷ 365
According to the utility, the methodology ensures proportionate recovery corresponding to the actual billing period and avoids disparities arising from varying billing cycles. DHBVNL argued that consumers are neither overcharged nor prejudiced by the existing system and that implementation of the earlier order would require extensive software modifications affecting billing operations across the distribution network.
The utility further contended that fixed charges recovered through the formula remain substantially aligned with the tariff approved by the Commission and are based upon actual billing days.
Commission's Analysis
Upon examining the submissions, HERC observed that the primary concern was whether consumers were being subjected to excess recovery of fixed charges due to variations in billing cycles.
The Commission noted that while billing periods may differ from consumer to consumer, a pro-rata methodology based on actual billing days cannot be considered inherently unlawful if the aggregate recovery over an entire financial year remains within the limits prescribed under the tariff order.
The Commission accepted DHBVNL's contention that practical difficulties could arise in implementing a rigid month-wise recovery mechanism across varying billing cycles. At the same time, it emphasized that consumer interests must remain protected and that the utility cannot recover fixed charges beyond what is permissible under the approved tariff framework.
Relief Granted
Allowing the review petition, HERC clarified that DHBVNL may continue to levy fixed charges using its existing pro-rata formula linked to billing days.
However, the Commission imposed an important safeguard by directing that the total fixed charges recovered from a consumer during a financial year must not exceed the amount recoverable under the tariff schedule on a monthly basis.
The order effectively balances operational practicality for the distribution licensee with protection against any excessive recovery from consumers.
Significance of the Order
The ruling provides regulatory clarity on fixed charge billing practices adopted by distribution utilities. While recognizing the operational realities of varied billing cycles, HERC has reaffirmed that tariff-approved limits cannot be exceeded and that consumer interests remain paramount.
The decision is expected to have implications for billing methodologies adopted by power distribution utilities across Haryana, particularly in cases involving pro-rata recovery of fixed charges for billing periods that do not exactly correspond with calendar months.