DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SUBARNAPUR
C.C. No.13 of 2017
Seshadeb Hota, S/o. Late Ram Chandra Hota, aged about 63 years, represent through his Power of Attorney Holder Ghadi Gopal Hota, S/o. Bideshi Hota, aged about 31 years, R/o. village Dhuldula, P.S. Ullunda, District – Subarnapur
………….. Complainant
Vrs.
1. The Sectional Officer, Ullunda Electrical Section At/P.O./P.S. Ullunda, District – Subarnapur.
2. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Birmaharajpur Electrical Division, At/P.O./P.S. Birmaharajpur, District - Subarnapur
3. The Executive Engineer, Electrical WESCO, SED, Sonepur, At/P.O./P.S. Sonepur, District - Subarnapur
………….. Opp. Parties
Advocate for the Complainant …………. Sri G.S.Panda
Advocate for the O.Ps. …………. Sri B.C.Panigrahi
Present
1. Sri U.N.Purohit, President
2. Sri H.Padhan Member
Date of Filing Dt.23.10.2017
Date of Hearing Dt.31.01.2023
Date of Order Dt.13.02.2023
J U D G E M E N T
By Sri U.N. Purohit, P.
The complainant files complaint U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The brief fact of the complaint petition is that the complainant is the Power of Attorney Holder of Ghadi Gopal Hota, being the Attorney holder the complainant Seshadeb Hota filed this present case.
The complainant Seshadeb Hota representing Ghadi Gopal Hota filed this complaint on the fact that he installed Rice Huller at Dhuldhula for his self employment and to maintaining his livelihood. The complainant being consumer of electricity vide Consumer No.915001050006 has connected electricity to his Rice Huller he had cleared all the dues in the month of December 2015 the complainant paid total outstanding dues Rs.20,600/- to the O.Ps., thereafter he has paid regular electricity dues as per his consumption/meter reading.
-: 2 :-
The O.Ps. supplied meter to the establishment of the complainant, the meter reader regularly visited the establishment, verified the meter. The O.Ps. supplied electricity bill as per consumption. The complainant has never tempered the meter or by pass the electricity wire to his establishment. On March 2016 the meter reader appointed by the O.Ps. namely Keshab Chandra Rout visited the establishment of complainant taken meter reading and illegally demanded Rs.1000/- as bribe from complainant on refusal threatened him to put in trouble and also threatened to disconnect the electricity.
In the first week of April 2016 the O.P. No.1 disconnected the electricity without assigning any reason. The complainant and his authorized person made several complaint to O.P. No.1 and 2 with a request to connect electricity in the Rice Huller but the O.P. No.1 and 2 neither mentioned any reason for disconnection nor taken steps for supply of electricity. After several visit to the office of the O.Ps. they disclosed on 30.03.2016 one WESCO staff had inspected the premises of rice huller and found the complainant illegally using electricity by passing the meter and according to them due to said reason the electricity supply to the establishment of the complainant has been disconnected, demanded Rs.1,48,780/- from the complainant as penalty. The complainant became surprised on hearing said fact from the O.Ps., he strongly protested to the O.Ps. and disclose that no staff of WESCO had visited or inspected at his establishment, the complainant claims to the O.Ps. to inspect again to ascertain the truth. The O.Ps. refused the request of the complainant and refused to reconnect the electricity without payment of penalty amount. As a matter of fact none of the WESCO staff visited the establishment of the complainant, no inspection report has been prepared in his presence and nothing has been supplied to him showing inspection of the premises of the complainant premises. The O.Ps. without opportunity given to the complainant impose penalty and before penalty not supplied provisional assessment bill. As such violated the provisions of Electricity Act. The action of O.Ps. not in accordance with law.
-: 3 :-
The electricity supplied to the premises in the month of December 2015 after payment of outstanding dues. The complainant paid bill for the month of January and February amounting to Rs.1495/-. So as per law the penalty impose exceeding one and half times of traffic payable by the complainant for the period of December 2015 to February 2016. Even if any unauthorized use of electricity.
The complainant has never used electricity bypassing the meter, he has never unauthorizedly use electricity but due to non payment of illegal money to the meter reader the O.Ps. has illegally disconnected the electricity and illegally claimed money from the complainant. The complainant served pleader notice narrating the illegal demand and illegal disconnection and claim for reconnection as the O.ps. failed to supply electricity. The complainant unable to run the Rice Huller which affected his livelihood to meet his day to day expenses. The O.Ps. failed to provide proper service and they are deficient in service by adopting unfair trade practice for which the complainant sustained mental agony, harassment and financial loss. The O.Ps. are liable to give compensation for his sufferings and liable to supply electricity immediately and the penalty impose by the O.Ps. be declared as illegal and directed him not to claim any amount as penalty. Compensation of Rs.95,000/- for sufferings, Rs.4000/- as cost of litigation.
The O.Ps. filed their written version denying the allegation and maintainability of the complaint on the ground that the complainant is not a consumer and the supply of electricity is for commercial purpose. The present case related to against raising of assessment order following detection of unauthorized use of energy bypassing the meter. On 30.03.2016 under mass checking process in the consumer area the AM(Com) MRT Bolangir alongwith other staff visited the premises of the consumer and found that he was availing power supply bypassing the meter. The terminal cover was cut and two phase (R&Y) were cut with bypass done since the consumer and his representative was not in the premises all these exercise were carried out in presence of person namely Dugru Acharya who claims to be related to complainant and engaged in the Rice Huller. The copy of inspection report was also supplied to said Dugru Acharya with due acknowledgement. Provisional assessment was made to the tune of
-: 4 :-
Rs.1,48,781/- which was served on the consumer inviting objection if any by him within 7 days and granting the date of hearing fixed on 12.04.2016. The consumer did not prefer to raise any objection so also did not participate in personal hearing so finding no other way the assessing Officer taken decision to impose final assessment of Rs.99,187/- applying his best judgment keeping in view the nature of unauthorized use so also loss of the system. The final assessment order was served to the complainant the licensee having responsibility and duties to take recourse like disconnection assessment lodging of report with police on violation of 126 and 127 of Electricity Act 2003.
The allegation raised in complaint do not constitute any merit to dispute the legality of the assessment proceeding advancing some procedural lapses, no such procedural lapses done by the O.Ps. The complainant raising various plea at belated stage and filed this complaint as after thought with imaginary fact without any basis. As a matter of fact the role of meter reading is limited to take reading` of meter and he is no way concerned about status of supply of meter or service wire. The complainant was found use electricity bypassing the meter. The meter reader has no role to put the complainant in trouble or to disconnect the electricity, and no such complaint before the higher authority of WESCO or to police. The power supply was disconnected following detention of unauthorized use of energy, the provisional assessment order is not illegal but in consonance with Section 126 of Electricity Act. The MTR staff visited the premises in presence of one Dugru Acharya with following all proper procedure. The assertion of demand of Rs.1,48,780/- itself is a proof of service of provisional assessment order./ The final assessment order of Rs.99,187 speak about false allegation of claim for reconnection so also refusal demanding Rs.148780.00.
In view of law of Section 126 of Electricity Act, the complaint against the assessment order is not maintainable and liable to be rejected. The O.Ps. filed inventory report, provisional assessment order final assessment order and bill extract of the consumer for adjudication of the dispute.
The complainant filed affidavit, bills for the month of February 2016 and inspection report signed by one Dugru Acharya supplied by the O.Ps. on demand by the complainant. The O.ps. has filed documents final assessment order dt.29.06.2016
-: 5 :-
provisional assessment order dt.30.03.2016 and the inspection report by the MRT Sonepur signed by Dugru Acharya.
On perusal of document and rival contention of the parties, the following points needs to be answered for proper adjudication of the case.
i). Whether the complainant is a Consumer ?
ii). Is there any inspection in the premises of complainant and found inspection report is genuine to attract U/s.126 of the electricity Act.
iii). Whether the documents filed and relied on by the O.Ps. are genuine ?
iv). Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief ?
On perusal of the complaint petition and version of O.Ps. it is admitted the complainant is a consumer of electricity for running of a Small Rice Huller. The Small Rice Huller is not a big business units for profit but it is known to all concern, the unemployed person in rural area are employed themselves by installing Small Rice Huller for their livelihood as such. The complainant is consumer under C.P. Act under clause – Explanation substituted by Act 62 of 2002 Section 2.
It is admitted that the complainant and O.Ps. that while the MRT staff claim to have inspected the premises of the complainant, the complainant or his authorized person was absence and the MRT staff finding no authorized person of the complainant obtain signature of one Dugru Acharya who is claim by the O.P. to have related with the complainant. The complainant in his affidavit denied any relationship with the said Dugru Acharya and the O.Ps. has not filed any evidence that Dugru Acharya is related with the complaint and received the inspection report. The claim of O.Ps., inspection report supplied to complainant is failed and no such report is within the knowledge of the complainant.
The inspection report shows 9245 Unit was consumed by the consumer on 30.03.2016 while the Bill of February 2016 shows the status of meter was 9860 Unit as per report of the meter reader bill was prepared. So it is not possible to shown 615 Unit less after one Month at the time of inspection if there is any inspection by the MRT they must shown more Unit then February Bill. So it is presumed that the inspection report
-: 6 :-
has been manufactured by the O.P. to justify the illegal demand for the purpose of 126 of Electricity Act and to harassed the complainant. The document filed by the O.P. on the above ground are not genuine. The provisional and final assessment bill has been prepared to save from liability. The O.Ps. have not file any documents showing the provisional assessment bill was served on complainant. No postal A.D. available in record. The O.Ps. are involved in unfair trade practice and deficient in providing proper service as such they are liable to pay compensation and other relief as claimed by the complainant.
Hence we direct the O.Ps. to connect the electricity to the Rice Huller of the complainant if the same is available after long lapse of time and if the complainant desire. The penalty under the colour of assessment order U/s.126 is illegal and liable to be set aside. The O.Ps. are restrained to claim any amount as per assessment made by the assessing officer. Further the O.Ps. are directed to pay compensation of Rs.80,000/- towards the harm cause to the complainant and Rs.2000/- as cost of litigation. The O.Ps. are directed to comply the order within two months from the date of order. Complaint is partly allowed.
Applications pending, if any, stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for perusal of the parties. File be consigned to record room alongwith a copy of this judgment.
Dated the 13th day of February 2023
Typed to my dictation
I agree. and corrected by me.
Sri H.Padhan Sri U.N.Purohit
Member President
Dt.13.02.2023 Dt.13.02.2023
