PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR
Consumer Complaint No.- 159/2024
Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,
Sri. SadanandaTripathy, Member,
Deepak Kumar Sahaya, aged about 62 years,
S/O- Late Surrya Kumar Sahaya,
R/O/PO- Modipara, PS-Town,
Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha. ….…......Complainant.
-Vrs.-
- Section Officer, Tata Power Western Odisha Distribution Limited(TPWODL)
Ainthapali, PO/PS-Ainthapali, Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha.
- Sub-Divisional Officer, Tata Power Western Odisha Distribution Limited(TPWODL), PO/PS-Ainthapali, Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha.
- Executive Engineer, Tata Power Western Odisha Distribution Limited(TPWODL)
Ainthapali, PO/PS-Ainthapali, Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha.
…...……….Opp. Parties
Counsels:-
- For the Complainant :- Sri. A.K.Tripathy & Associates
- For the O.P.s :- Samapika Mohanty & Anurag Dash
Date of Filing:08.05.2024, Date of Hearing :24.09.2024, Date of Judgement :11:11.2024
Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT
- The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant is having an ancestral residential house in Ainthapali with electricity connection. After death of his father Complainant shifted to Modipara and the premises kept under the care of Surekha Gupta and her husband from September 2000 to March 2003. A nursery was run/given charge to Surekha Gupta for watering. During their stay no electricity connection was there as it was disconnected earlier. On 12.09.2007 the Complainant applied for new electricity connection for commercial purpose after payment of inspection fees vide M.R. No. 044596058. The O.Ps refused to give connection saying outstanding arrear against Surekha Gupta. On enquiry it was found that the O.Ps were collecting money providing Consumer No. COM-6A-265.
In 2014 when Complainant a gain sought for new connection the O.Ps refused as connection was existing in the name of Surekha Gupta. The Complainant was compelled to use said connection and to pay the bill.
On 07.09.2017 the vigilance team disconnected the power supply. The Complainant after one month paid a sum of Rs. 15,000/- on 09.01.2017 as the O.Ps claimed heavy amount to adjust the arrear outstanding of Surekha Gupta.
The Complainant approached permanent Lok Adalat, Sambalpur and vide order dated 27.03.2019 directed the O.Ps to restore power supply in consumer No. COM-6A-265 depositing 50% of the claim of Rs. 9050.50 i.e. Rs. 4525.25. The Complainant was also directed to pay the regular subsequent consumption bill. Said PLA case No. 6/2018 was disposed of on 10.07.2021 as not pressed.
Application was made before GRF to intervene on the matter on 18.04.2024. The GRF also directed to negotiate with O.P.No.2. Vide letter dated 25.04.2024 the Complainant approached the O.P.No.2 to provide relevant documents but the O.P.No.2 only provided statement of account in the old account COM-6A-265 and new A/C No. 411721120322 of Surekha Gupta.
On 08.03.2024 the O.Ps disconnected the power supply and asked the Complainant to pay Rs. 20,000/- to-wards arrear. The O.Ps are providing account statement from March 2017 to March 2024.
The Complainant filed I.A. Case No. 09/2024 for immediately reconnection of power supply.
- The O.Ps in reply submitted that Consumer No. 4117-2112-0322 corresponds to old No. COM-6A-265 in the name of Surekha Gupta with permitted load of 3 KW/LT/General purpose. The Supply has been extended since 14.03.2007. Due to irregular payment till April 2024 an amount of Rs. 1,76,891.08P is lying outstanding against.
This is a billing dispute and complaint is not maintainable. The Complainant is not a consumer of the O.Ps nor authorised by Surekha Gupta. The O.Ps have no knowledge relating to ownership of the properly in the name of Complainant. PLA Case No. 6/018 has been withdrawn at the distance of the Complainant. Complaint was filed by the Complainant before GRF, Burla Vide Case No. BRL/264/2024 which is pending for final disposal. As per statement of Complainant Surekha Gupta was a tenant and occupying the premises till last part of 2013. As per the Complainant Surekha Gupta left the premises in 2014. Surekha Gupta was using the power in the premises. As per OERC Regulation the subsequent occupier is liable to pay the arrears. For unauthorised use assessment has been made against the Complainant/occupier. After lapse of 14 years the Complainant disputed the bills. On 07.09.2017 the Consumer was using unauthorised load of 2KW tampering the meter. PVR was prepared and Rs. 67,986/- assessment was made. Payment of Rs. 15,000/- on 09.01.2017 is denied.
For Same cause of action two cases are pending and this Complainant is liable to be dismissed.
The old records are not available except the billing ledger. The Complainant remained silent since 14.03.2007. The Complainant violated the order of PLA, Sambalpur. With malafide intention complaint has been filed.
- Perused the documents filed by both the parties. The Complainant filed I.A. No. 09/2024 and this Commission directed the Complainant to deposit Rs. 50,000/-. The Complainant on 23.05.2024 deposited the amount. The Complainant was also directed to submit relevant documents for fresh connection by the O.Ps within 7 days. The O.Ps were directed to restore power supply with immediate effect. The Complainant filed violation Misc. Case No. 05/2024 before this Commission alleging that the O.Ps rejected the application and reconnected the connection lying in the name of Surekha Gupta. Notice was issued to the O.Ps. The Complainant submitted that application on 24.05.2024 depositing Rs. 9510/- vide receipt No. 20240241143171. The O.PS rejected the application No. TPW 10782575 without assigning any reason. The Complainant filed the violation Misc. Case. The O.Ps not submitted any show-cause why the new connection was not given.
- After perusal of the documents and pleadings of the parties it reveals that the Complainant occupies the premises after Surekha Gupta. The connection taken by Surekha Gupta from 14.03.2007 is continuing till now. The Complainant admitted that since 2014 he occupied the premises and till date staying in the premises. As per Regulation 17(vi), 18,20, 31 and 41(c) of the OERC Code, 2019 the Complainant has to bear the outstanding dues. Further it is the admitted case of both the parties that case No. BRL/264/2024 is sub-judiced before the G.R.F, Burla relating to billing dispute. This Commission does not feel to interfere on the matter as the dispute is pending before learned GRF, Burla.
The Complainant not applied for new connection as per provision of Regulation 18 of the Distribution code, 2019 and accordingly rejection of the application is not against the provision of law. We do not find any vilation of the order of the Commission. Accordingly, the Misc. Case No. 05/2024 is rejected.
- From the version submitted by O.Ps it further reveals that proceeding u/s 126 of the Electricity Act against the Complainant has been initiated and the Complainant admitted the said facts. As the matter is sub-judiced the Complainant is at liberty to redress his grievance before the learned GRF, Burla and accordingly the complaint is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11th day of Nov, 2024.
Supply free copies to the parties.
