1. The Executive Engineer , Keonjhar Electrical Division V/S Sri Radhakanta Mahanta
Sri Radhakanta Mahanta filed a consumer case on 24 Feb 2016 against 1. The Executive Engineer , Keonjhar Electrical Division in the Kendujhar Consumer Court. The case no is 04/2015 and the judgment uploaded on 26 Feb 2016.
Orissa
Kendujhar
04/2015
Sri Radhakanta Mahanta - Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Executive Engineer , Keonjhar Electrical Division - Opp.Party(s)
24 Feb 2016
ORDER
IN THE COURT OF THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KENDUJHAR
CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 4 OF 2015
Sri Radhakanta, Mahanta, 60 years,
At- Kandsar, P.O- Basantpur,
P.S- Pandapada,
Dist- Keonjhar, Pin- 758014 ……………….Complainant
Vrs.
1. The Executive Engineer (Elect.),
Keonjhar Electrical Division,
At/P.O/Dist- Keonjhar, Pin-758001
2. The Junior Engineer, Lift Irrigation (O.L.I.C),
The brief facts of the case are that the Complainant had availed financial assistance from Govt. for establishment of a Bore Well in his land for irrigation of agricultural land. The Ops have provided all the accessories like digging of bore well and electrification. After that the OP-1 & 3 have provided electrification to the bore well on 5.6.2012 and the OP-2 had installed Motor Pump on 17.2.2013.The OP-1 & 3 have charged Rs.4302/- in the electricity bill from 5.6.2012 to 17.2.2013 towards electricity consumption which was illegal and arbitrary and to this the Complainant lodged complaints on such illegal imposition on electricity bill, though the motor pump was made defunct for a period of six months and to this the complainant consulted at the Consumer Counseling Centre at DCDRF, Keonjhar on 26.2.2013 but there is no result fruitful came out and hence this case:
After service of notice to all the OPs, the OP-1 & 3 have appeared through their Authorized person and filed their written version. But the OP-2 does not appear and hence set-exparte whole time of the complaint. The OP-1 & 3 have stated in their version that the case is not maintainable and has no basis without any substance was not tenable in the eyes of law. Further the OP-1 & 3 stated that the bill of the complaint had already been revised on actual meter reading and this was intimated to the Counseling Centre vide their letter dt.10.10.2013 from June 2012 to August 2013 in which there was a deduction of amount of Rs.3918.37p from the arrear amount enclosed in (Annex-1 series & Annex-2) respectively along with the meter installation report (Annex-3). Hence, the complaint may be dismissed as the complaint has already been solved and bared by limitation.
Heard the parties and perused the materials available in record. It is not disputed that the complainant is a consumer before the OP-1 & 3 but disputed the bills supplied to him by taking provisional basis and without consumption of electricity due to fault of the motor pump from 5.6.2012 to 17.8.2013 and to this context the OP-1 & 3 submitted that after getting complaint from the complainant the bills supplied had already been revised and a sum of Rs.3918.37p had been withdrawn from the arrear amount by taking actual meter reading of which revision statement/ ledger copy of billing summary annexed as Annex-1 series and Annex-2 & Annex-3.
On the other hand it reveals from the Annex-1 series and Annex-2 filed by OP-1 & 3 a sum of Rs.3918.37p has been deducted in the ledger out of arrear of Rs.7253.7p by taking meter reading on actual basis for 432 units billed from June 2012 to August 2013 as per (Annex-3).
With these materials available on records it is proved that the OP-1 & 3 are no way deficient in rendering service to the complainant and when electricity dues pending as outstanding and for non-payment of electricity dues it is not deficiency of service on the part of OP-1 & 3.
ORDER
Hence, the OP-1 & 3 are directed to provide correct/ revised bill afresh from August 2013 (as per Annex-1 series) to till date to the complainant for payment of electricity dues onwards by taking actual meter reading from 20768 units (as per Annex-3) within 30 days of receipt of this order and the complainant is directed to deposit 50% towards arrear of electricity dues after getting the revised bill within the same period. No order as to cost and compensation.
Accordingly the Case is disposed of.
I agree I agree
(Sri S.C. Sahoo) (Smt. B. Giri) (Sri A.K. Purohit)
Member Member (W) President
DCDRF, KEONJHAR DCDRF, KEONJHAR DCDRF, KEONJHAR
Dictated & Corrected by me
(Sri S.C. Sahoo)
MEMBER, DCDRF, KEONJHAR
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.