JUDGMENT : 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been directed against order dated 31.01.2020 passed by “Electricity Ombudsman”, U. P. Electricity Regulatory Commission, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, respondent-5 in Representation No.79 of 2008 (Sri Ved Prakash Pandey and two others v. Sri Dharmendra Kumar and others) and order dated 04.02.2019 passed by Electricity Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as 'ECGRF') in Complaint Case No.70 of 2018 (Sri Jay Narayan Tyagi and others vs. Sri Rajkumar Tyagi and another). 2. Petitioner is an Association of Owners of Apartment of a High Rise Building having residential Apartments etc and is registered as Apartments Owners Association (hereinafter referred to as “AOA”) under provisions of Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1860”). Apartments were developed by M/s KDP Infrastructure Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as “Apartments' Promoter/Builder”) and after completion and sale of flats and registration of AOA, maintenance of 12 towers out of 15 have been handed over to Petitioner's Association. As 3 towers are still not complete, thus we are not concerned with the same. 3. Apartments' Promoter/Builder obtained single point electric connection of the contracted load of 5000 Kilowatt (hereinafter referred to as 'KW') for entire group of society but has released only 1000 KW load to Petitioner's Association. Respondent no.3 i.e. Electricity supplier namely Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitram Nigam Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'PVVNL') is issuing a common bill since it is a single point electricity connection. 4. System of giving electric connection to Apartments is that after single point bulk load connection, separate electricity connections have been given to all Apartments installing internal meters for each apartment. These internal meters are prepaid meters and amount is charged earlier by Apartments' Promoter/Builder and now by petitioners in respect of flats of 12 towers which have become part of their Association. Apartments are in four categories i.e. 825 square feet, 1125 square feet, 1250 square feet and 1550 square feet. Smaller apartments of 825 square feet and 1125 square feet are allowed 3 KW load while remaining two larger categories are allowed 5 KW load. Apartments are in four categories i.e. 825 square feet, 1125 square feet, 1250 square feet and 1550 square feet. Smaller apartments of 825 square feet and 1125 square feet are allowed 3 KW load while remaining two larger categories are allowed 5 KW load. Tariff has been framed by PVVNL with approval of U. P. Electricity Regulatory Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'UPERC') under provisions of Indian Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 2003') for the year 2019-20 in which Fixed Charge for bulk load supply at single point are determined at Rs.110 per KW per month. 5. In some cases, AOA was charging higher fixed charges from Flat Owners than what it was paying to Supplier. This issue was raised by certain Flat Owners in Complaint Case No.70 of 2018 (Shri Jai Narayan Tyagi and others v. Raj Kumar Tyagi, Chairman and another) before ECGRF. Application was allowed by ECGRF vide order dated 04.02.2019 and following directions were issued : ^^ifjoknh dk ifjokn la[;k&1 ds fo:) Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gS vkSj foi{kh la[;k 1 dks fuEu vkns'k fn, tkrs gS%& 1- vikVZesaV es jgus okys ySV Lokfe;ks ls fQDlM pktZ ds en esa ogh /kujkf'k olwyh tk,xh tks /kujkf'k foi{kh la[;k&1 ySV Lokfe;ksa ls olwy ldrk gS] blls vf/kd ughaA 2- foi{kh la[;k&1 }kjk 03 ekg ds Hkhrj vko';d vkSipkfjdrk, iw.kZ djus ds mijkar ukekarj.k ifjorZu gsrq izkFkZuk i= foi{kh la[;k&2 fo|qr foHkkx ds ;gkW fn;k tk;sxk ftlesa foi{kh la[;k&2 fo|qr foHkkx }kjk iw.kZ lg;ksx iznku fd;k tk;sxkA 3- foi{kh la[;k&1 }kjk ySV Lokfe;ks dks muds }kjk mi;ksx dh xbZ fo|qr ds lEca/k es O;fDrxr mi;ksx vkSj lkekU; mi;ksx nksuks ds lEca/k esa vyx&vyx fcy tkjh fd;s tk;saxsA 4-+ foi{kh la[;k&1 ySV Lokfe;ks dks fu;fer :i ls fo|qr fcy tkjh fd;s tk;sxsaA 5- foi{kh la[;k&1 }kjk fo|qr fcy ds lEca/k esa j[ks x, vdkmaV dk izR;sd o"kZ pkVsZM vdkmaVsV ls ijh{k.k djk;k tk;sxk vkSj ijhf{kr vdkamV dks izR;sd foŸkh; o"kZ dh lekfIr ds rhu ekg ds Hkhrj miHkksDrk dks voyksdukFkZ izLrqr fd;k tk;sxkA 6- foi{kh la[;k&2 mijksDr vuqrks"kks dk vuqikyu vius Lrj ls foi{kh la[;k&1 }kjk djkuk lqfuf'pr djs vkSj vuqikyu vk[;k ,d ekg ds Hkhrj Qksje dks Hksth tk;sA 7- ,ŒvksŒ,Œ }kjk miHkksDrkvks ls oLkwyh /kujkf'k rFkk ykbZlsalh dks Hkqxrku dh x;h /kujkf'k dh x.kuk izR;sd N% ekg esa djds miHkksDrkvksa dks miyC/k djk;k tk;sxkA^^ 6. Aforesaid order of ECGRF was challenged by petitioner before Electricity Ombudsman, Lucknow in Representation No.79 of 2019 but the same was rejected vide order dated 31.01.2020 and order of ECGRF passed on 04.02.2019 was confirmed. 7. Now both these orders have been challenged by petitioner before this Court on the ground that Tariff framed by Electricity Supplier with approval of UPERC cannot govern the charges leviable by petitioner i.e. AOA from ultimate consumers i.e. Flat Owners and Fixed Charge paid to electricity supplied by PVVNL cannot be a guiding factor. 8. In our view, this submission is thoroughly misconceived. Petitioner is not holding any license of distribution of electricity to anyone. It is an Association of individual Flat Owners and modus operandi of supply of electricity is that Distribution Licensee i.e. PVVNL gives a single point supply to one set of Flat Owners through either Builder i.e. Promoter of flats or where Resident Welfare Association i.e. Flat Owners Association have been formed, to them. Payment to Electricity Department is made by Apartment Promotor/ Builder or AOA, as the case may be, but individually supply to Flat Owners is given by them and charges paid to PVVNL stand collected proportionately as per individual meter readings of flats from flat owners. Builder or AOA neither can frame their own tariff nor can charge the flat owners on a rate higher than what is prescribed in the Tariff approved by UPERC for the area concerned. The basis of charges of individual owners is tariff of Distribution License since in respective area, no other individual having no license can distribute electricity to anyone and charge in the manner it likes. Therefore, contention of petitioner that Fixed Charge rates prescribed in Tariff cannot be a guiding factor for realization of electricity charges from Flat Owners by petitioner is thoroughly misconceived and illegal. 9. We find no manifest error in the impugned orders assailed in this writ petition. 10. Writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed accordingly.