Corruption in Smart Meter Installations undermines public trust and leads to significant financial losses. Fraud can occur during the procurement process, where individuals exchange kickbacks for contracts. It can also happen in the installation phase, where technicians inaccurately calibrate meters for personal gain. This not only affects consumers, who face inflated bills, but also jeopardises the integrity of energy management systems. Additionally, inadequate oversight allows corrupt practices to flourish, exacerbating the issue. As smart meters become integral to modern energy grids, addressing these vulnerabilities remains essential. It is crucial to ensure transparency, efficiency, and fairness in energy distribution and consumption.

Smart Meter Installation and Armoured Cable Controversy in Mirzapur District (Corruption in Smart Meter Installations)

In Mirzapur District, Uttar Pradesh, the installation of smart meters has sparked major public complaints. There are accusations of “deep-rooted corruption.” Officials are using old, unarmoured cables instead of the newly required armoured cables. This is for buildings within 40 metres of the Low Tension (LT) line.

---

Key Allegations and Grievance Details (Corruption in Smart Meter Installations)

The complainant, Yogi M. P. Singh, has filed multiple grievances through both the Government of Uttar Pradesh (GOVUP) and the Prime Minister’s Office Public Grievance (PMOPG) systems. His concerns focus on the inconsistent practices during the smart meter installation process. He also alleges corrupt practices associated with these installations. (Corruption in Smart Meter Installations)

• The Core Issue: The primary concern is the failure of the contractor for the smart meter installation. The contractor did not substitute the old service cable with a new armoured cable for the following two connections:
  1. MAHESH PRATAP SINGH (Account No: 2704668219)
  2. Keshav Pratap Singh (Account Number 8667726000)
• Official Admission: The Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division II, Mirzapur, Mr Manish Kumar Srivastava, confirms the setup terms obtained through an RTI request. The terms state, “Premises whose maximum distance from the LT line is 40 metres. Armoured cable is being installed on the same premises.”
• Allegation of Scam: The complainant contends that, despite this official policy, most consumers do not receive this assistance. This suggests a systemic failure and a potential scam. In this scenario, the government funds the cost of the armoured cable but does not provide it to the consumers.

---

Response from the Authorities

The official responses to the grievances highlight procedural compliance but have failed to satisfy the complainant regarding the specific issue of the cable substitution.

• Executive Engineer’s RTI Response: The communication obtained under the Right to Information Act 2005 provided the following information:
  • Armoured Cable Policy: We confirm that the installation of armoured cable occurs for premises within a 40-metre maximum distance from the LT line.
  • Installation Agency: The external agency (contractor) installs the smart meters, not the department employees.
  • Record Absence: Several queries regarding fund details and monitoring staff prompted a response that dismissed them, stating, “The information sought is not in the office records.”
• Grievance Closure: The authorities marked one of the grievances (PMOPG/E/2025/0058307) as “Case closed.” The remark stated आख्या श्रेणी – नीति विषयक प्रकरण (Report Category – Policy Matter). It also noted अधीनस्थ अधिकारी के स्तर पर निस्तारित (Disposed of at the level of the subordinate officer).

---

The Right to Reason and Administrative Accountability

The complainant invokes the principle of the “Right to Reason,” an indispensable part of a reasonable administrative system.

• Unanswered Question: The fundamental question remains. Why did they not substitute the old cable with the armoured cable? This was required by the setup terms and conditions for connections that fall within the specified 40-meter range?
• Dissatisfaction: The complainant explicitly marks the grievance as “Not Resolved.” They cite “Harassment by official” and reiterate that the matter concerns “deep-rooted corruption.” This issue is overlooked by the accountable staff of the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited (UPPCL).

The whole issue shows a big gap between the government’s policy of providing armoured cables up to 40m and how the contracting agencies actually implement it. This raises serious questions about monitoring, accountability, and the misuse of public funds meant for consumer benefit. (Corruption in Smart Meter Installations)

Public reports and consumer council statements about smart meter installations in Uttar Pradesh highlight concerns regarding these installations. This includes the Purvanchal Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited (PVVNL) region, where Mirzapur is located. Consumers have made serious allegations against companies that are blocklisted in other states. Despite this, these companies are still receiving contracts in UP.

Blocklisted Companies in the UP Smart Meter Contracts

The most prominent allegations regarding blocklisted companies in the UP smart meter project involve the following:

• Companies: M/s Genus Power Infrastructure Ltd. and M/s HPL Electric & Power Ltd.
• The Allegation: Avdhesh Verma, the Chairman of the Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Consumer Council (UPSECC), alleged that both companies received multi-crore smart prepaid meter installation orders in UP. The Goa government’s Electricity Department barred them by putting them in a block list. Furthermore, the department prohibited them from participating in future smart meter tenders. These tenders are issued by both the Goa government and the central government.
• Context: This issue arose as part of a larger controversy. It concerns alleged irregularities in the tender pricing and the quality of the meters. The Consumer Council is demanding an investigation. Corruption Investigation Demand for Lalganj Officials.

While the search results confirm that these companies face accusations that resulted in blocklisting in Goa and subsequently receiving contracts in UP, your initial grievance regarding armoured cables in Mirzapur does not specify which contractor is responsible for the on-ground installation in that division.

Summary of the Broader UP Smart Meter Controversy: (Corruption in Smart Meter Installations)

The concerns you raised about deep-rooted corruption and the denial of armoured cables in Mirzapur are part of a wider, multifaceted controversy in Uttar Pradesh’s smart meter rollout. (Corruption in Smart Meter Installations)

Issue	Details
Blocklisted Companies	Allegations claim that Genus Power and HPL Electric were blocklisted in Goa but awarded major contracts in UP.
Armoured Cable Scam (Mirzapur Grievance)	Contractors are allegedly failing to install free armoured cable for connections within 40m of the LT line, suggesting misappropriation of funds meant for the new cable.
Financial Irregularities	Allegations of a massive discrepancy (around ₹8,500 crore) between the Central Government’s sanctioned project cost and the tender awarded by UPPCL, leading to higher costs for consumers.
Technical Flaws	Reports of meters running slow, smart meter mobile apps not working, and issues with old meter reading data transfer (as noted in the Mirzapur grievance), leading to disputes over billing.

The contractor in Mirzapur did not provide the required armoured cable, supporting the claim that high-level irregularities directly influence the project’s on-ground implementation.

The major contractor installing smart meters in the Mirzapur region is GMR Smart Electricity Distribution Private Limited, in short, GSEDPL.

Contractor for Mirzapur Smart Meters (Corruption in Smart Meter Installations)

The contract for the smart metering project in Mirzapur falls under the jurisdiction of Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (PuVVNL).

• Main Contractor: GMR Smart Electricity Distribution Private Limited (GSEDPL), a subsidiary of GMR Power and Urban Infra Limited (GPUIL).
• Contract Zone: GSEDPL received the Letter of Award (LOA) for the Purvanchal region, covering the Prayagraj and Mirzapur zones, along with the Varanasi and Azamgarh zones.
• Project Scope: The contract, under the central government’s Revamped Distribution Sector Scheme (RDSS), requires the contractor to design, supply, install, commission, and operate & maintain (O&M) smart meters. The project will deploy approximately 2.3 million smart meters across the Prayagraj and Mirzapur zones.

The Executive Engineer, Mr Manish Kumar Srivastava, mentioned in the grievance, confirmed that an “external agency and not the department employees” installs the smart meters. GMR Smart Electricity Distribution Private Limited operates as this external agency, utilising various subcontractors and technicians (such as those hired via Vision India Service Pvt Ltd, as shown in job postings) to carry out the actual installation work on the ground.

Connecting the Allegations

The revelation of the main contractor links your specific grievance about the armoured cables directly to the broader, high-stakes smart meter project.

1. Contractual Responsibility: GSEDPL is ultimately responsible for ensuring that their subcontractors meet the terms of the contract, including the provision of a new armoured cable for all premises within the 40-metre limit.
2. Corruption Allegation: The GMR subcontractor or the PUVVNL monitoring staff likely failed to provide the required armoured cable, suggesting a breakdown in the system. This leads the complainant to allege that someone is misappropriating funds intended for the new cable.
3. Blocklisted Company Context: While GMR is not one of the companies (like Genus or HPL) explicitly flagged as blocklisted in Goa but given a contract in UP, the entire mega-project faces controversy concerning procurement and implementation standards across the state. (Corruption in Smart Meter Installations)

The current status of your grievance shows that a “subordinate officer” has addressed the issue, but it remains unresolved to your satisfaction. The contracting agency (GSEDPL or its subcontractor) continues to refuse the 40-metre armoured cable, violating the confirmed policy by the specific Executive Engineer.

Related: Ancestral Properties Controversy: Legal Rights Explained