The Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum in Nagpur has ruled that MSEDCL cannot recover rooftop solar charges lacking legal backing, cancelling Rs 4,394.67 billed as “Other Charges” to a Nagpur consumer.
The Forum ordered bill revision from February 2026, detailed calculations, and Rs 1,000 compensation, stressing that any levy must be supported by MERC regulations, tariff orders or official instructions.
In a significant relief for rooftop solar users, the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum in Nagpur has ruled that Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd (MSEDCL) cannot recover money from consumers by imposing charges that are not supported by any law, regulation or tariff order.
The Forum cancelled Rs 4,394.67 charged to a Nagpur resident under the head “Other Charges” in his February 2026 electricity bill. The amount was added after MSEDCL claimed the consumer had exported more solar power to the grid than what was permitted.
The Forum directed MSEDCL to remove the disputed charge, revise all electricity bills issued from February 2026 onwards, provide detailed calculations to the consumer, and credit Rs 1,000 towards the cost of pursuing the case.
The case was filed by Nagpur resident Dinesh C Naidu, who has a 4 kilowatt rooftop solar system connected under the net metering scheme. He questioned why he had been charged for exporting excess solar power and repeatedly asked MSEDCL to explain the legal basis for the recovery.
According to the order, MSEDCL argued that the consumer had installed solar panels with a capacity higher than the sanctioned 4 kW and therefore the additional charge was justified. However, the consumer disputed this claim and also referred to a March 2026 advisory issued by the Union Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), which allows up to 10 per cent variation in rooftop solar system capacity.
More importantly, the consumer argued that MSEDCL had failed to show any regulation, tariff order, circular or billing instruction that allowed it to collect such charges.
During the proceedings, the Forum gave MSEDCL several opportunities to submit documents supporting its action. The order records that the utility could not produce any regulation, tariff order or official instruction authorising the levy. It also failed to explain how the amount was calculated or under which approved billing methodology it had been recovered.
The Forum observed that the charges were imposed without legal authority and held that they could not be sustained. It noted that the dispute could have been avoided if the utility had acted in accordance with the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (MERC) regulations and addressed the consumer's complaint at the initial stage.
The ruling is expected to be closely watched by rooftop solar consumers across Maharashtra. Consumer groups say that some consumers have reported unexplained entries such as "Other Charges" or charges linked to excess solar exports in their electricity bills. The order makes it clear that electricity distribution companies cannot recover money from consumers unless the charge is supported by an approved regulation or tariff order.
The Forum has directed MSEDCL to comply with the order within the stipulated time and submit a compliance report within 60 days.