The Manipur State Power Distribution Company Limited (MSPDCL) once again finds itself in the public spotlight—and not for the reasons it might have hoped. Consumers of Imphal Electrical Divisions I, II, and III are voicing growing dissatisfaction over the rollout of the new Smart Prepaid Meters manufactured by Polaris Smart Metering, a company based in Jaipur, Rajasthan, which many claim have brought confusion, inconvenience, and extra financial burden rather than the promised ease of use.
In a public notice issued on July 9, 2025, the General Manager (Commercial) of MSPDCL announced the commencement of smart prepaid meter installation across Imphal Electrical Divisions I, II, and III as part of the Revamped Distribution Sector Scheme (RDSS). The initiative, according to MSPDCL, is aimed at improving the reliability of power supply and enhancing consumer services. The work for installation and technical support for this smart meter are executed by the M/s Sangai Smart Metering Private Limited, the authorized agency selected by the MSPDCL.
The company further promoted the use of mobile applications such as the “Urja Seva Sangai” app and the “MSPDCL Smart Meter” app, which it claimed would allow consumers to track real-time electricity consumption, monitor usage, and recharge balances conveniently.
MSPDCL had announced the new smart meters with much fanfare, touting them as a modern solution that would end the hassle of manual recharges and usher in a seamless digital experience. Yet, instead of convenience, consumers are complaining of rising bills, technical glitches, and poor customer service.
Several consumers allege that their electricity consumption cycle has drastically shortened. Under the old analog meters, a recharge of ¹ 1,000 lasted 30–31 days for some small household consumers. After the installation of smart meters, the same amount reportedly lasts only 20–21 days, raising suspicions of inflated billing and overcharging.
Earlier, if power was cut due to overload, households with analog meters could instantly restore electricity by manually dialing “0.” With the new smart meters, however, consumers must wait for an auto-reload that can take up to 30 minutes—a delay many describe as intolerable, especially during urgent household needs. This is seen as the biggest setback of the smart meter in a society where uninterrupted power is essential. Questions are now being raised over whether MSPDCL is deliberately compelling consumers to increase their sanctioned kilowatt capacity in order to avoid such issues, thereby automatically boosting the company’s revenue.
Despite MSPDCL’s announcement that consumers would be able to recharge directly through its new mobile app, the experience has not matched expectations. The app technically allows recharging, but instead of providing a fully integrated native feature, it redirects users to the existing prepaid recharge website (https://billing.mspdcl.info/) through a web view.
While the use of a web view has the advantage of quick deployment and consistency with the current online portal, it falls short when compared to a native in-app recharge system. A native option would have offered a smoother experience, faster processing, better integration with mobile payment services, and an overall user-friendly design.
Considering the scale of the project, the reliance on a simple web view instead of a proper native recharge feature makes the much-publicized upgrade appear incomplete and less convenient than what consumers had been led to expect.
Consumers also report delays after installation. In some cases, it takes up to a week for the meter to be fully activated, during which households face difficulties in recharging and managing their electricity supply. For daily wage earners and small businesses, this gap period has created unnecessary hardship.
Customer care helplines, meant to serve as the first line of support, have become symbols of frustration. Many callers report that representatives are either uninformed about the new system or dismiss complaints with generic responses. Others are told to lodge grievances via WhatsApp, where complaints disappear into what citizens describe as “a bottomless well of official indifference.”
Even MSPDCL staff seem poorly equipped to handle public queries, with many admitting they themselves lack proper training on the new meters. Analysts believe the project was heavily outsourced to third-party vendors, leaving a communication gap between the system’s designers and MSPDCL’s frontline workforce. The result: mismanagement, consumer mistrust, and an accountability vacuum.
The rollout reflects poor planning and lack of preparation. In standard practice, major technological systems undergo rigorous stages of planning, development, testing, and real-world validation before full deployment. MSPDCL, however, appears to have bypassed crucial testing phases, jumping straight from development to deployment—leaving chaos in its wake.
Public dissatisfaction is mounting rapidly, with citizens questioning whether the so-called “smart” meters are actually just old problems repackaged in a digital shell. For many households, what was pitched as a technological leap forward now feels like yet another burden imposed by a corporation notorious for missteps.
MSPDCL should solve the problem before these smart meters are installed all over the state. If the problem lies with the entire product, the smart meters should be replaced with reliable products from another company.
What consumers truly need at this stage is not the introduction of “smart” meters, but the assurance of sufficient and uninterrupted power supply around the clock. In a state where frequent power cuts remain a daily challenge, the priority should be strengthening generation, transmission, and distribution infrastructure to guarantee 24-hour electricity.