JUDGMENT : 1. Sri. Shahbaaz Hussain, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri. V.R. Balasubramani, learned counsel for respondent have appeared in person. The ranking of the parties is referred to as per their ranking before the Electricity Ombudsman. 2. The facts are stated in brief as under: M/S SRS Steel Pvt Ltd is a Private Limited Company engaged in the manufacturing of steel and other metals and is also a registered customer of the respondents with R.R.NO.MLRHT267 serviced under HT2A category. The company is drawing power from the grid of BESCOM and also availing power under the Open Access through the Indian Exchange Energy (IEX). It is stated that clause 6.3(f) of the Karnataka Electricity Grid Code (KEGC), 2015 requires the distribution licensees to provide on a day ahead basis at 09:00 hours each day its estimated demand for each 15 minutes block. The BESCOM being a distribution licensee is required to adhere to the said clause and bill the Open Access consumers on the 15 minutes time block. On technical reason of non-availability of data prior to March 2017 in the meters, the BESCOM was unable to bill the Open Access consumers on 15 minutes time block. The Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC) issued a letter on 11/5/2016 to the BESCOM with the direction to comply with the provisions of clause 6.3(f) of KEGC, 2015 forthwith and bill HT consumers availing open access on 15-minute time block. Subsequent to the issue of the letter, the BESCOM worked on the technical difficulties and got meters in place to record the 15-minute data in order to bill the HT Open Access consumers on 15-minute time block. It is stated that the BESCOM was able to record the data on 15-minute time block from March 2017 onwards. Accordingly, the BESCOM billed the Company on 15-minute time block for the month of March. From thereon, the BESCOM has been billing the company on 15-minute time block in accordance with Clause 6.3(f) of KEGC, 2015 and the letter dtd. 11/5/2016. It is averred that the KERC while discharging statutory duties of arriving at tariff of BESCOM passed order for the FY18 on 11/4/2017. From thereon, the BESCOM has been billing the company on 15-minute time block in accordance with Clause 6.3(f) of KEGC, 2015 and the letter dtd. 11/5/2016. It is averred that the KERC while discharging statutory duties of arriving at tariff of BESCOM passed order for the FY18 on 11/4/2017. In the letter, it was brought to the notice of the BESCOM about the non-compliance of clause 6.3(f) of KEGC 2015 by the BESCOM and consequently issued directives to comply with the said clause and submit compliance report from May 2017 onwards. The BESCOM issued a circular on 29/5/2017 implementing the directives issued by the KERC on the 15-minutes time block. It is stated that the BESCOM revised its bills on the company to bring the same in conformity with clause 6.3(f) of KEGC, 2015; however, the same has not been paid by the company. Hence, BESCOM was constrained to issue a demand notice to the company on 3/1/2018 demanding the payment of revised bills. The company challenged the demand notice in W.P.NO.5637/2018 and the same came to be disposed vide order dtd. 6/2/2018 of directing the BESCOM to assign reasons to its demand and pass a detailed order. Thereafter, the BESCOM adhering to the directions, passed a detailed order on 13/3/2018 upholding its earlier demand notice and made it unequivocal that it had relied on KERC letter dtd. 11/5/2016 in implementing 15-minute time block on Open Access consumers. The Company filed a complaint before the Consumer Grievance Redressal forum (CGRF) and the same came to be dismissed vide order dtd. 7/5/2018. The same was challenged before the Electricity Ombudsman In Case No.OMB/B/G-305/2018. The Electricity Ombudsman passed the order on 11/2/2019 thereby quashed the order dtd. 7/5/2018 and directed the BESCOM to withdraw the bills for the month of March and April 2017. It is this order which is challenged in this writ petition on several grounds as set out in the writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners and respondents have urged several contentions. 4. Heard the contentions urged on behalf of parties and perused the writ papers with utmost care. 5. The short point arises for consideration is whether the BESCOM is justified in raising the bill for the month of March and April 2017? 3. Learned counsel for petitioners and respondents have urged several contentions. 4. Heard the contentions urged on behalf of parties and perused the writ papers with utmost care. 5. The short point arises for consideration is whether the BESCOM is justified in raising the bill for the month of March and April 2017? It is not in dispute that the Company is an Open Access Consumer availing power from power exchange and also is drawing power from the grid of BESCOM. The Company is being a non-exclusive consumer procures power under Open Access by adhering to the schedule provided on a day ahead basis and the power consumed by it in excess to the said schedule is billed by the BESCOM under the applicable tariff. It is noted that the billing shall be made by considering the schedule and the corresponding actual consumption of energy in the 15- minute time block as per Clause 6.3 (f) of Karnataka Electricity Grid Code, 2015 (KEGC) . Suffice it to note that the Karnataka Regulatory Commission enacted Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (Karnataka Electricity Grid Code) Regulations 2015, in exercise of power under clause (h) of sub sec. (1) OF Sec. 86 read with clause (zp) of sub sec. 181 of the Electricity Act 2003 (36 of 2003). A notification in NO KERC/J/02/1/2000 dtd. 2/2/2016 was also issued. As per clause 6.3(f) of the Karnataka Electricity Grid Code, 2015 (KEGC) requires the distribution Licensees shall provide SLDC on a day ahead basis at 09:00 Hours each day their estimated demand for each 15-minute time block for ensuing day. Distribution Licensee shall also provide SLDC estimates of loads that may be shed, when required, in discreet with details of arrangements of such load shedding. It is also not in dispute that the BESCOM along with other ESCOM's across the State had not been downloading the requisite data from the ABT Meters installed at the consumers premises to bill HT/EHT consumers who avail Open Access by considering 15-minute time block. The Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC) addressed a letter on 11/5/2016 vide Annexure-B to the BESCOM with a direction to bill the HT/EHT consumers who avail power under Open Access by considering 15-minute time block in accordance with clause 6.3(f) of the KEGC 2015. I have perused the same with care. It is an internal communication between KERC and BESCOM. The Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC) addressed a letter on 11/5/2016 vide Annexure-B to the BESCOM with a direction to bill the HT/EHT consumers who avail power under Open Access by considering 15-minute time block in accordance with clause 6.3(f) of the KEGC 2015. I have perused the same with care. It is an internal communication between KERC and BESCOM. The KERC in its Tariff Order dtd. 11/4/2017 noted the non- compliance of procedure contemplated under clause 6.3 (f) of the KEGC 2015 and accordingly directed all ESCOM's to forthwith comply with such procedure. The Tariff Order 2017 dtd. 11/4/2017 is at Annexure-D. I have perused the same with utmost care. The relevant portion is at internal page 176 of the Tariff Order. The same is extracted for the sake of convenience and clarity. [ii. Directive on preparation of energy bills on monthly basis by considering 15 minute's time block period in respect of EHT/HT consumers importing power through power exchange under open access. The Commission has noticed that, year on year, there has been a substantial increase in the number of EHT and HT consumers of the distribution licensees opting for open access resulting in substantial volume of energy being procured through Power Exchanges, which imposes a burden on the SLDC in grid management. Further, in accordance with the stipulations in Clause 6.3 (f) of the Karnataka Electricity Grid code (KEGC) 2015, under the chapter on Operation Planning, in order to facilitate demand estimation for operational purpose, the distribution licensee (ESCOM) required to provide to the SLDC on a day ahead basis at 09:00 hours each day, its estimated demand for each 15-minute block, for the ensuing day. The distribution licensee is also, required to provide to the SLDC the estimates of loads that may be shed, when required, in discrete blocks, with the details of arrangements of such load shedding. Consequent to such stipulation the ESCOM's are required to prepare monthly energy bills in respect of EHT/HT consumers importing power through power exchange under Open Access, by considering 15-minute's time block. However, it is observed that except in rare cases, this billing requirement is not being complied with the ESCOM's . In view of this, the Commission directs the BESCOM to ensure preparation of energy bills on monthly basis by considering the 15-minute's time block period in respect of EHT/HT consumers importing power through exchange under Open Access. However, it is observed that except in rare cases, this billing requirement is not being complied with the ESCOM's . In view of this, the Commission directs the BESCOM to ensure preparation of energy bills on monthly basis by considering the 15-minute's time block period in respect of EHT/HT consumers importing power through exchange under Open Access. The BESCOM shall implement the directive forthwith and the compliance regarding the same shall be submitted monthly from May 2017 onwards, to the Commission, regularly.] It is significant to note that it is only thereafter, the BESCOM issued a circular on 29/5/2017 for implementing the directives of KERC Tariff order. In this backdrop, the BESCOM billed the company by considering 15-minute time block from the month of March 2017 with clause 6.3 (f) of the KEGC 2015. While addressing argument, Sri. Subramani learned counsel for the company strenuously urged that BESCOM issued a revised bill on 3/1/2018 covering the period from March 2017 to December 2017 together with interest and demanded payment. Counsel also contended that the date of implementation of the KERC Tariff order for the months of March 2017 and April 2017 is not justified as in the Tariff order there is a clear mention that the implementation should be from May 2017. I have considered the submission made on behalf of the company. As already noted above, I have also carefully perused the Tariff order which is at Annexure-D and the relevant extract of the said order is also reiterated for clear understanding of the issue. As could be seen from the order, the same is dtd. 11/4/2017 and it is stated that the BESCOM shall implement the directive forthwith and the compliance shall be submitted monthly from May, 2017 onwards. The Tariff Order does not anywhere direct the BESCOM for implementation of its order is from March 2017 but only stipulate implementation forthwith and not for the retrospective months. Hence, the BESCOM is not justified in making a demand for the month of March 2017 and April 2017. It is needless to observe that the Electricity Commission Ombudsman referred to the material on record and justified in passing the order. This Court find no reason to interfere with the order. 6. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed.