The Bhadrak Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.,
Represented by it’s Secretary
Sri Saroj Ranjan Mohanty, aged 53 years
At/pO/PS/Dist:Bhadrak
…………………..Complainant
(Vrs.)
1. Executive Engineer, Bhadrak
North Electrical Division
2. S.D.O. Electrical Sub-Division No.1
Bhadrak,
Both are of Vill: Bypass
PO/PS/Dist:Bhadrak
…………………………Opp.Parties
For the Complainant: Sri Rabindra Kr.Ray & Ors.,Advs.
For the Opp.Parties : Sri Biswanath Sahoo, Adv.
Order No.40 dt.28.04.2015:
This complaint has been filed by Bhadrak Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd., Bhadrak, a leading premier financial institution, represented by its Secretary alleging deficiency in service against the O.Ps.
The case of the Complainant is that he is a consumer of electricity bearing consumer No.BX 1838C(Account No.01060030). On 13.06.2012 the O.Ps issued bill demanding energy charges for Rs.5,13,336/-. Thereafter, the Complainant approached the O.Ps disputing the billed amount and requested to provide electric meter and to revise the bill accordingly. The Complainant expressed his wish to pay energy charges on average consumption basis for last six months but the O.Ps refused to accept the energy charges. However, the O.Ps assured to rectify the bills and provide him a new meter. In spite of several correspondences the O.Ps neither revised the bill nor provided a new meter for which the Complainant suffered from serious mental agony and financial loss. So alleging deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps the Complainant filed this case on 10.07.2012 praying for a direction to O.Ps to provide a new meter, to revise the energy bill , not to charge energy bill issued on 13.06.2012 till disposal of the present complaint besides claiming compensation of Rs.95,000/- towards mental agony, unnecessary harassment/humiliation and damage.
O.Ps in their written version pleaded inter-alia that the case is not maintainable before this Forum as per provision of Electricity Act, the case is barred by limitation and there is no cause of action to initiate this proceeding against the O.Ps. According to O.Ps, the consumer account of the Secretary, Urban Bank bearing No.BX-1838 is a commercial consumer of NESCO with contract demand of 1.5 KW. The consumer bill was raised in every month on load factor basis due to defunct meter up to 13.06.2012 The Complainant has never filed any representation before authority objecting to such bill. The consumer has also not opted for installation of a correct meter during the period from October,2008 for which bill was raised on load factor basis in each month according to the regulation of OERC. The consumer premises were verified on 05.02.2009 to know the reason for failure of the electric meter again and again. On verification of the premises it was detected that the consumer was availing 7 KW load as against contract demand of 1.5 KW. Accordingly, penalty was imposed on the consumer amounting to Rs.1,88,332/- for such use and the consumer was also asked to have 3-phase power supply executing agreement with supply company for which the revision of load factor bill can be possible but the consumer remained silent and it could not be possible for revision of the load factor bill by the Supply Company. The total arrear reached to Rs.5,23,875/- up to June,2012 whereas the consumer continued to consume the power supply without payment. Further, single phase meter can stand up to the load of 5 KW and exceeding the load 5 KW needs 3-phase meter of supply. Since the existing load of the consumer is 7 KW, it requires 3-phase supply with 3-phase meter according to it’s standard specification. The consumer is not opting to get such 3-phase supply for which it is not possible to revise the load factor bill. The supply company shall revise the bill immediately if the consumer avails 3-phase supply.
We have heard the Ld.Counsel appearing on both sides and perused the documents available on record. As the O.Ps refused to receive energy charges, the Complainant apprehending disconnection of power supply filed this case praying for a direction to the O.Ps to maintain staus-quo till their appearance. O.Ps filed objection praying to vacate the order of status-quo since more that Rs.5,00,000/- was outstanding against the Complainant. Having heard both sides, this Forum in it’s order dt.12.11.2012 directed the Complainant to deposit Rs.1,00,000/- towards arrear dues. Simultaneously, the O.Ps were directed not to disconnect power supply and to change the defective meter with a new one after maintaining all formalities. Thereafter, the O.Ps acknowledging Rs.1,00,000/- from the Complainant replaced the defective meter by a new one.
Therefore, the prayer that only subsists is revision of bill. On perusal of record, it is found that O.Ps have filed billing statement of Complainant for the period from April,2005 to November,2010 but from October,2008 onwards bills have been raised on Load factor basis sometimes for 324 units and sometimes for 1512 units as a result of which arrear outstanding increased month after month. In the month of September,2008 the actual consumption was 163 units and there was an outstanding amount of Rs.12,567.04 against the Complainant. Further, the O.Ps have filed statement of account from December,2010 to August,2014 showing charging of energy bill on load factor basis for 1512 units from December,2010 till February,2013 and 1207 unit for the month of March,2013. Thereafter, actual reading has been taken i.e. 83 units for the month of April,2013, 41 units for the month of May,2013, 44 units for the month of June,2013, 49 units for the month of July,2013, 27 units for the month of August,2013, 61 units for the month of September,2013 etc. which indicates consumption is within 100 units per month. From this statement, it is also noticed that after payment of Rs.1,00,000/- and some other amount, the outstanding is Rs.5,19,093.63 paise as on August,2014. Similarly, it has been alleged by the Complainant that payment of Rs.200/- made under MR No.448150 dt.25.3.13 and payment of Rs.1500/- made under MR No.193270 on 19.11.2014 have not been reflected in the aforesaid up-to-date statement of accounts filed by O.Ps in this case on 10.11.2014. Record also reveals that penalty of Rs.1,88,332/- has been imposed on the consumer for unauthorized use of electricity basing on spot verification report dt.05.02.2009. It is also found from record that the Complainant has made representation dt.25.3.2011, 31.5.2011 and11.6.12 requesting the O.Ps to replace the defective meter. Even though O.Ps received the aforesaid letters they have not replaced the meter. Regulation 56((1) of OERC, Distribution (Condition of Supply) Code,2004 reads as follows:
Regulation-56(1)- Supply and installation of meters and Cut-outs/MCBs/CBs “The licensee shall supply the meter (unless the consumer elects to supply the same), cut-out/MCB/CB/load limiter to consumers at the time of providing new service connection or at any other time as required”.
If the regulation says that licensee shall supply the meter unless the consumer elects to supply the same at the time of providing new service connection or at any other time as required and the consumer has requested the O.Ps to replace the defective meter by a new, we do not understand what prevented the O.Ps to shut eyes ignoring their interest? Consequently, it is found that the O.Ps are deficient in rendering proper service to Complainant in replacing the defective meter and not debiting the payment made under valid money receipts. Accordingly, it is ordered:
O R D E R
In the result, the complaint is allowed against the O.Ps. The O.Ps are directed to revise the energy bill of the Complainant from October,2008 till March,2013 taking average reading for 3 months of the newly installed meter by debiting payment of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.200/- made under MR No.448150 dt.25.3.13 & Rs.1500/- made under MR No.193270 on 19.11.2014 besides any other payment made and not reflected in the statement of account filed by the O.Ps, within a period of 30 days of receipt of this order. Parties to bear their own costs.
