ORDER

By Smt. C. S. Sulekha Beevi, President,

1. The complainant who is a consumer under opposite party for the supply of electricity to his flour mill has filed this complaint, challenging the bill issued by opposite party for Rs.1,33,944/- under section 126 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003, alleging theft of energy. Along with the complaint I.A.33/2010 was filed by the complainant praying for interim orders to restore his electricity connection.

2. The standing counsel for Kerala State Electricity Board, Smt. K.P. Sumathi entered appearance on behalf of opposite party and filed counter in the petition along with documents.

3. After hearing both sides and perusal of pleadings with documents it is seen that the bill challenged in this complaint is a provisional bill issued by opposite party under Sec.126 of Electricity Act. As per the provisions laid in Sec.126, after receiving the provisional order, the consumer is entitled to file objections, if any against the provisional assessment before the assessing officer. Such officer may after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing pass a final order of assessment, within 30 days from the date of service of such order of provisional assessment.

4. Section 126(4) provides that a person served with the order of provisional assessment may accept such assessment and deposit the assessed amount with the licensee within seven days of service of such provisional order upon him. Sec.127 of Electricity Act gives a right of appeal to the aggrieved consumer. Under Sec.127 it is the final order passed under Sec.126 that can be challenged and not a provisional order. The Hon’ble Apex Commission in Jharkhand State Electricity Board and another Vs. Anwar Ali 2008 CTJ 853(CP) NCDRC has held that ’against the assessment order passed under sec.126 of the Electricity Act, a consumer has option either to file appeal under Sec.127 of the Electricity Act or to approach the Consumer Forum by filing a complaint. He has to select either of the remedy. Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to interfere with initiation of criminal proceedings or the final order passed by any Special Court constituted under Sec.153 or the Civil liability determined under Sec.154 of the Electricity Act.

5. In the instant case, the Anti Power Theft Squad conducted an inspection of the premises on 18-01-2010 and theft of energy was detected. It is the case of opposite party that the service line was looped and by passed. On detailed inspection of energy meter it was found that 3 resistors of blue colour were additionally soldered and fitted in the circuit to reduce the measurement of actual power. On checking the meter with caliberated meter it was found that 66.66% of energy consumed was not being recorded in the meter. So the bill for rs.1,33,944/- was issued imposing twice as penalty. Bill was served to the consumer on 19-01-2010. It is furthered averred by opposite party in the counter that the consumer was given seven days time upon the bill. It is also stated in the counter that opposite party will be conducting hearing as per the rules and regulations. It is crystal clear that the bill challenged by the complainant is a provisional bill and not a final order of assessment.

6. It was then submitted by the counsel for complainant that the consumer had filed his objections before the assessing officer. But the same was returned to the consumer by opposite party after writing on the reverse side of the objections that the amount to be paid as per bill is Rs.1,33,944/- and the amount to be paid for compounding the offense is Rs.4,70,000/-. The learned counsel for complainant argued that if opposite party did not receive the objection it amounted to deficiency in service and that the complaint would be maintainable. We are not able to appreciate this argument put forward by the counsel for complainant. The objection filed and alleged to be returned to the complainant was produced on behalf of the complainant. This document is dated, 20-01-2010 ie., one day after the service of the provisional bill. On perusal of this document it does not appear to be objections against the assessment. It is a grievance petition (സങ്കട ഹരജി) filed to opposite party praying to set aside the provisional bill and also denying the allegations. On the reverse side of this it is seen written in malayalam, as, loss caused to Kerala State Electricity Board – Rs.1,33,944/-, for compounding the offence Rs.4,70,000/-’. On behalf of opposite party it was submitted that the complainant requested to cancel the bill to which he was told that it was not possible. He enquired about compounding the matter and showed interest in the same. To this he was informed separately as to how much he would have to pay as per the bill and for compounding the offence. As per Sec.126(4) the complainant had enough time for depositing the amount or compounding the offence. If the complainant was really aggrieved that opposite party refused to accept his objections then he could have send the same to opposite party by registered post/speed post. However, he cannot challenge an order that has to become final. Opposite party even now has enough and more time to complete the proceedings of hearing and passing final order. Prior to the passing of the final order by the assessing officer the complainant has approached the Forum. The decision of the assessing officer has not become final. An appeal under Sec.127 of the Electricity Act or a complaint before the Forum will not lie. The complaint is premature and hence not maintainable. Hence we dismiss the complaint as not maintainable. The petition for interim orders disposed accordingly.

Dated this 1^st day of February, 2010.

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN,

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER