THE SUPREME COURT has affirmed the authority of the then Energy Regulatory Board (ERB), now Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC), to order the reconnection of a disconnected electric service, even if the disconnection is due to alleged power pilferage, pending resolution of the complaint filed by a consumer against an electric firm.

In a decision penned by Justice Cancio C. Garcia, the Court’s Second Division affirmed the Court of Appeals in affirming ERB’s order for the reconnection of the electric service to the business establishments of one Edgar L. Ti in Little Baguio, San Juan City.

The Court said that under ERB rules, the Board “is endowed with the authority to hear and adjudicate complaints for reconnection of electric service and to grant provisional or ancillary relief during the pendency of the main action.” It pointed out “while a complaint for reconnection of a consumer’s electric service is inter-related to the criminal action for violation of RA 7832 (Electricity Anti-Pilferage Law), the determination of the propriety of the reconnection remains distinct and independent from the criminal action.”

“The dominant and primordial objective of a criminal prosecution is the punishment of the offender, while a complaint for reconnection is intended merely to address a consumer’s grievance against an electric service provider with respect to the generation, transmission and supply of electric service,” said the Court. (Meralco v. ERC and Ti, GR No. 145399, March 17, 2006)