Vrs.
- JEE, Electrical Section Office(ESO),
Barabazar Section
TATA Power Western Odisha Distribution Ltd.(Formerly WESCO)
At-Jalangali, PO-Khetrajpur,
Sambalpur-768003.
- SDO-II, Khetrajpur,
Sambalpur Electrical Division,
TATA Power Western Odisha Distribution Ltd.(Formerly WESCO)
Near Khetrajpur Railway Station, Cheruapara,
Sambalpur-768002. ...……….Opp. Parties
Counsels:-
- For the Complainant :- A.Agrawal, Authorised Representative
- For the O.P.s :- Pravata Kumar Sahoo, SDO
Date Of Filing :03.03.2023,Date Of Hearing :29.05.2023, Date Of Judgement : 03.07.2023
Presented by Sri Sadananda Tripathy, Member.
- The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant is a consumer of the OPs having consumer No. 411622100543 since the period of OSEB. All of a sudden the electrical meter became defective in the month of March, 2016 and showed a consumption of 50000 units for March, 2016 in the billing. The Complainant immediately informed the OPs and they visited the premises of the Complainant and found the meter to be defective. They informed the Complainant regarding non-availability of meter in stock and assured that the defective meter would be changed at the earliest. The Complainant expressed his concern that only two options are left with him viz. either to stay in dark or continue using the defective meter which recorded a consumption of 50000 units in a single month which the Complainant may be bound to pay in future, if not rectified immediately. The Complainant was also worried of heavy provisional bills at the challenging age of more than 80 years. The OP verbally advised the Complainant that he may use the electrical line installed in the name of his son in the premises for the first floor of the building temporarily till the defects are rectified. Since, the said defective meter was not changed and correction of erroneous electrical readings was not made even after several reminders, the Complainant filed a written complaint to the OPs through letter dt. 01.06.2016 duly acknowledged by the staff of the OP, recording the above mentioned facts. Acknowledgement of the written complaint dt. 01.06.2016 has also been mentioned by the OP in its submission before the Court. Non-redressal of the complaint forced the Complainant to lodge a case before the GRF, WESCO, Burla. A physical verification was done by the Op on 18.08.2017 vide PVR bearing No. W 0037322 wherein it was recorded that “the electrical meter is in a non-display condition and electric bill may be reviewed. This PVR is for GRF Case No. 65, 04.08.2017”. Another physical verification was done by the OP on 08.09.2017 and after a gap of around one and a half years, new electrical meter was installed in the premises of the Complainant. Upon verification, it has been categorically mentioned by the OP in the physical Verification Report bearing No. 0095895 dt. 08.09.17 issued to the Complainant and his son which reads as “The meter of consumer No. 4116-2210-0543 was defective. So the consumer is availing power supply through other meter installed in the same premise bearing consumer No. 4116-2210-0508. The premises is a 2 stair building. The defective meter was changed and installed a new meter”. The word “So” in the observation of the OP recorded in the PVR clearly is very significant and indicates that the fact was with in the knowledge of the OP and with the advise of the OP. No electrical consumption has been used during the period the electrical meter was defective i.e. March, 2016 to 08.09.2017. From this fact, it is clear that Complainant’s electrical consumption is zero during the period March, 2016 to 08.09.2017. But from the submissions of the OP, for the period March, 2016 to August, 2017, Energy Billing has been Revised @ 725 Units per month. As submitted by the OP @ Rs. 65,475/- & Rs. 2,619/- are being revised EC & revised ED, respectively, thus amounting to Rs. 68,094/- in aggregate has been charged which is illegal. The said period amount of Rs. 68,094/- may be waived out due to non-supply of electrical meter in proper time and no electrical consumption in consumer No. 4116-2210-0543 of the Complainant during the said period. Raising provisional bills at Rs. 46,181.04 during the period the electrical meter was defective and not used and subsequently revising and finalizing it at Rs. 68,094.00 is contra dictiory to the own findings of the OPs as recorded in the PVR. The very direction of th GRF is erroneous on the basis of which revision of bills has been made by the OPs resulting in creation of erroneous demand of Rs. 68,094/- is contra dictionary to the own findings of the OPs and the GRF and erroneous demand of Rs. 68,094/- on the basis of erroneous direction of the GRF has forced the Complainant to lodge the subject case filed before this Hon’ble Commission.
- The Show-Cause of the OPs is that the Complainant is irregular in paying the energy bills for which the outstanding dues against the consumer up to March, 2023 is Rs. 31,873/- after adjustment of all the payments made by him. The Complainant with false declaration managed to get two number of electric connections in his premises, one in the name of the Complainant and another in the name of his son. Relating to consumer number 4116-2210-0543 the Complainant filed a case before the GRF, Burla vide Case No. 99/2017 for revision of provisional bills from March 2015 to January 2016 and March 2016 to August 2017. But before filling of the case the provisional bills from March 2015 to January 2016 had been revised and thereby an amount of Rs. 20,859/- had been credited to his billing accounts in March 2017 as reflected in the billing ledger. Although initially meter was not available for a very short period, for replacement but when the same was made available the consumer did not allow/cooperate for replacement of the meter. Further, in case of defective meter there is no need to divert the load to other connection because the consumer can avail load with defective meter. As per provision of law the provisional bills would be revised after taking average actual consumption after installation of new meter. The Complainant diverted the load after replacement of new meter only to reduce the actual consumption for getting benefit in revision of provisional bills. During hearing of the case before the GRF the consumer agreed to cooperate for replacement of the defective meter and consequently a new meter has been installed in his premises on 08.09.2017. The GRF, Burla vide its order dtd. 13.09,2017 directed to revise the energy bills from March 2016 till installation of new energy meter on the basis of succeeding three months’ actual consumption. After installation of new meter, the Complainant with a malafide intention diverted all his load to the other connection in his premises which is recorded in the name of his son, by way of using a change over switch. By such diversion of load the consumption of the new meter was nill in the billing months of September, October & November 2018 up to 21.12.2017 as per the Physical Verification Report, for which the Provisional bills from March 2016 to August 2017 could not be revised in the month of December 2018 as per direction of the GRF, Burla. On 18.01.2018 (billing month of December 2017) meter reading was recorded as 725 kwh and taking initial meter reading as ‘0’ as on 21.12.2017 (as per PVR dtd. 21.12.2017) and final meter reading as 725 as on 18.01.2018 the previous provisional bill of the Complainant has been revised and thereby an amount of Rs. 21,912.96p has been debited to the billing account of the Complainant in February 2018. The Complainant has also been intimated about the revision of bill and requested to pay the outstanding arrear. The Complainant was billed as per provisional basis during the period March 2015 to December 2015. In the billing month of January 2016 the consumer was billed as per actual meter reading for 992 units for an amount of Rs. 3400.66p. The closing balance of December 2015 billing was Rs. 27,206.58p and including the current bill of Rs.3400.66p the bill for the month of January 2016 was Rs.30,607.24p. After actual billing an amount of Rs.5203.50p has been refunded to the consumer for the provisional billing from March 2015 to December 2015. The Complainant paid Rs. 10,000/- in the month of January 2016. After adjustment of all the amount (27,206.58+3400.66-5230.50-10,000) the closing balance of January 2016 was Rs. 15,346.14p. In the billing month of February 2021 issued in the month of March the consumer was billed as per actual for an amount of Rs.70,688/- including outstanding arrear and the consumer was requested to pay the outstanding dues during the collection drive in March 2021. The energy meter installed in the premises of the Complainant on 08.09.2017 is working well till date and the consumer has been billed as per actual consumption. Taking average consumption after installation of the new meter the provisional bill from March 2016 to August 2017 has been revised and accordingly an amount of Rs.21912.96p has been debited to the billing account of the consumer. Since the actual consumption is more than the provisional billing, after revision the afore mentioned amount has been debited to the consumer’s account. There is no assessment to the consumer rather revision of bill as per direction of the GRF, Burla. So in view of the aforesaid facts & applicable provisions of law there is absolutely no cause of action for filing the present case. Since the Complaint is devoid of any merit, the Complainant is not entitled to any relief & the instant complaint filed by the Complainant is liable to be dismissed.
- From the above facts it is found that the Complainant managed to get two number of electric connections in his premises, one in the name of the Complainant and another in the name of his son. The Complainant diverted the load after replacement of new meter only to reduce the actual consumption for getting benefit in revision of provisional bills. The Complainant is negligent in paying the energy bills for which there is a huge amount of outstanding bills/arrears. So there is no deficiency of service found against the OPs. Though there is a dispute of billing problem, this Commission is not competent to deal the matter. So the Complainant is advised to take shelter before appropriate forum which has been established under law. So it is ordered that the case is dismissed on contest. No cost.
Order pronounced in the open Court today on 3rd day of July, 2023.
Free copies of this order to the parties are supplied.
