Hyderabad consumer commission finds insufficient evidence in Rs 17.4 lakh HMWSSB billing dispute
Hyderabad: A consumer complaint alleging that HMWSSB raised bills without supplying water has been dismissed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Hyderabad, which held that the complainant failed to produce sufficient evidence to establish deficiency in service. The commission, comprising president B Uma Venkata Subba Lakshmi and members C Lakshmi Prasanna and B Raji Reddy, passed the order on September 7, 2026, transferred from the District Commission, Rangareddy.
Mohammed Shanawaz Khan, 52, a businessman and resident of Serilingampally, had filed the complaint on December 20, 2024. He said he owned property at Anjaiah Nagar and had obtained water supply and sewerage connections on August 9, 2018, under CAN No. 619678758 in the MASC-Non Domestic/MSB Commercial category.
Complainant alleged bills were raised without supply
Khan alleged that water was not supplied from the date of connection, while bill collectors continued to raise inflated bills without taking meter readings. He said he initially stopped paying the bills to “vent out his agony”, but cleared the dues in November 2022 after OP No. 1 assured him that proper water supply would be provided. According to him, the supply still did not resume.
He submitted representations to the authorities on July 5 and October 18, 2023, but said the issue remained unresolved. He sought a refund of Rs 17.4 lakh paid towards bills since September 22, 2018, Rs 2 lakh towards the connection application, Rs 50 lakh as compensation for mental agony and suffering, Rs 5 lakh as punitive damages and Rs 50,000 towards litigation costs.
HMWSSB disputed the allegations and sought dismissal of the complaint. It said an estimated payment intimation of Rs 13.91 lakh, including Rs 4 lakh for laying a 99-metre pipeline, had been issued and supply released on August 6, 2018 after completion of the procedure. The board said the complainant defaulted on consumption payments until October 2019, following which the connection was disconnected and placed in DC mode on October 16, 2019.
Commission finds evidence insufficient
The board said supply was restored on January 16, 2023 after Khan paid Rs 3 lakh against outstanding dues of Rs 7.92 lakh. It also maintained that the connection was in the MSB-Non Domestic category, attracting a minimum billing of 168 KL for a 50 mm connection irrespective of actual consumption. Since the complainant had not submitted an Occupancy Certificate, it said charges were levied at three times the normal tariff under G.O.Ms. No. 168 and the Telangana Building Rules, 2012.
The commission held that the burden of proving deficiency in service rested on the complainant, referring to the Supreme Court ruling in Ravneet Singh Bagga vs KLM Royal Dutch Airlines. It found that, apart from two representation letters marked Ex.A2 and Ex.A3, no concrete evidence was produced to show that water had not been supplied. An incomplete photograph showing a meter reading, without a month stamp, was also held insufficient.
The customer ledger (Ex.A1), along with Khan’s own admission that he had deliberately withheld payments, weighed against his case. The commission concluded that the opposite parties had acted in accordance with statutory provisions, billing norms and government notifications. It dismissed the complaint in its entirety, with no order as to costs.
