DATE OF FILING: 12.09.2013
DATE OF DISPOSAL: 25.04.2018
Mr. Karuna Kar Nayak, President:
The complainant B. Maheswar Subudhi has filed this consumer complaint U/S 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in electricity service against the Opposite Parties (for short, the O.Ps.) for redressal of his grievance before this Forum.
2. Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that the complainant is a self-employed and bonafide consumer of the O.Ps since long bearing No.A3-D-998 & New Account No. 342202070177. The complainant received an electricity bill for the bill period November 2012 on 28.12.2012 and came to know that the meter installed in the premises of the complainant bearing No.7030294 has recorded the consumption units not as per actual consumption. The complainant is being law abiding citizen approached the O.P. No.1 & 4 several times to rectify the said meter and/or replace the said meter and revise the bills as per actual consumption according to Reg. 86 of OERC Distribution (Conditions of Supply) Code 2004. The O.P.No.1 instead of correct the defect in meter by repairing or replace the said meter and issued correct electricity bill on the basis of actual consumption as complainant complained for, in connivance with the O.P.No.2 and its staff conducted inspection of the meter mentioned supra through Inspection Officer (Name and Designation of the said Inspection Officer not mentioned) on 10.01.2013 and issued a details of meter inspection and load census bearing No. 7658 on the same day i.e. 10.01.2013 which specifically contend that, “ Accucheck (bearing No. ACL 40306) result found OK “after applied load of 110W with applied voltages of 220 V and the error in meter comes to +1.32%. On the date of inspection, the Inspection Officer of the O.Ps applied a new seal on TC bearing No. A 025934 (Annexure 2). But inspite of the issuance of Annexure-2 , the O.P.No.2 to collect a huge amount from the complainant intentionally implicated the present complainant under Section 126 of the Electricity Act and issued a Provisional Assessment Order bearing No. 623/dated 18.01.2013 for sum of Rs.16,039/- towards unauthorized use of electricity for “Meter found Tampered” for 24 months under section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and also directed to complainant to appear in person on 28.01.2013 at 11.00 AM at the O.P.No.2’s office alongwith schedule of provisional order and statement of calculation under Provisional Assessment which have been received by the complainant on 26th January 2013 (Annexure 3). The complainant on the basis of the Annexure 3 went to the office of the O.P.No.2 on the scheduled day but nobody was there to receive the written objection nor to heard the matter in person as time fixed. After intervention of O.P.No.5, the O.P.No.1 & 4 have been replaced the old meter bearing No. 7030294 on 5th February 2013 with new meter bearing No. 354585 and as per provision of the OERC Distribution (Conditions of Supply) Code, 2004, he O.P.No.1 4 and its staff applied new seals on the said meter on the same date but the O.Ps did not hand over the written acknowledgment about the installation of meter and seal numbers to the complainant on repeated demand of the complainant. The purchase receipt, meter testing reports and meter handed over to the O.P.No.1 for installation of meter and now said documents are with O.P.No.1. Without issuing any disconnection notice as per the Electricity Act and as per OERC Distribution (Conditions of supply ) code 2004 and without showing any sufficient reasons to the complainant disconnected the power supply to the said new meter which was installed in the premises of the complainant. After intervention and reconciliation of the O.P.No.5, the O.P.No.1 received a sum of Rs.2000/- towards penal amount bearing Receipt No. AA 290615, Book No.01454 on 26th February 2013 and restored the power supply to the complainant’s premises on the same day i.e. 26th Feb 2013. The O.P. No.1 in connivance with other O.Ps to harass intentionally issued the electricity bill to the complainant against the old meter bearing No. 7030294 since the bill period Feb’13 till dates. And inspite of installation of new meter bearing No. 354585 on 5th February 2013, the O.P.No.1 & 4 in connivance with other O.Ps did not choose to print new and correct meter number and actual consumption of energy reading as recorded in units on the said bills issued by the authorized meter reader of O.Ps and now the said bills are disclosing the status of meter as “D” the meter is defective, the meter reading is 32104 as showed in bill for the bill period December 2012 dated 28.01.2013. Since the date of installation of new meter bearing No. 354585 the O.P.No.1 &3 are failed to provide revised electricity bill against the new meter as per actual consumption of the complainant. Non issuance of correct and electricity bill as per actual consumption is tantamount to negligence and rendering deficient in service. When the complainant inquired about the matter, the O.P. No.4 demanded illegal gratification to the complainant to issue the revised, corrected and on the basis of actual consumption bill against the new meter bearing No. 354585. As such the complainant ventilated the grievance to the O.P.No.1 & 3 in person and also submitted the said grievance in writing to the O.P.No.5 &6 which was duly acknowledged by the O.P.No.5 & 6 but to no avail. Nothing has been done as per statutory provision; the complainant approached the registered consumer protection organization of the city namely, ‘VEDIC’ and authorized Organization to intervene into the matter. Accordingly, the VEDIC Organization issued an advice notice to the O.P.No.1 vide letter No. 20 dated 21.6.2013 alongwith intimated to the Deputy Electrical Inspector, Department of Energy, Govt. of Odisha through registered post with acknowledgment due. It is a mandatory service of the O.Ps to issue actual consumption bill in each and every month against the installed meter in accordance to Reg. 86 of the OERC Distribution (Conditions of supply) Code, 2004 but in the instant case, the O.Ps totally failed to do the same. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps the complainant prayed to direct the O.Ps to allow the following reliefs:
a) Issue the actual consumption bill from the date of installation of new meter.
b) Allow the complainant to avail the rebate on each electricity bill, which will be given from the date of installation of the new meter.
c) To pay value of service a sum of Rs.80,000/- to the complainant.
d) To pay compensation @ Rs.5000/- per month from November 2012 till final realization of the amount towards agonies suffered due to the grievous negligence and deficiencies in the services of the O.Ps jointly and severally to this complainant.
e) To pay litigation costs of Rs.10,000/- and punitive damages in such circumstances as it deems fit.
3. Upon notice the Opposite Parties filed written version through their advocates. It is stated the complainant has filed the above complaint with all false and frivolous allegations and denies all those allegations as vague and concocted. The complainant shall put to strict of the allegations those are not specifically admitted herein. The assertions made in para-2 as well as para-1 to the extent of consumer number are true and not disputed. Further assertion made in para-3 may be true and needs no comment. But the allegations made in para-4 are not true. The complainant has made vexatious allegation and he shall put to strict proof of the same. On 10.01.2013 with due process of law, the vigilance squad of South Co had inspected the premises of the consumer/complainant and checked his meter having Consumer No. A3-D-998 (342202070177), in his presence. During checking it has been detected that he is availing power supply though tampered meter, tampering its seals. Accordingly, the details of meter inspection and load census report was prepared with above observations and the same report vide No. 7658 dated 10.01.2013 was served on him. As against the same, he did not raise any objection. Basing on the same report, the assessing officer/O.P. No.2 had prepared Provisional Assessment order U/S 126(1) of the Electricity Act, assessing at Rs.16,039/- towards unauthorized use of electricity for the period of 24 months, as ascertained by him to the best of his judgment. The same order has been supplied to the complainant on 26.1.2013 under their letter No.623 dated 18.1.2013 as required U/S 126 (2) of the above Act. Under the same notice, the complainant has been required to file his objection, if any within 07 days of receipt of the same and to appear on 28.01.2013 at about 11.00 A.M. in order to give him an opportunity of hearing on the same. But, he neither filed any show cause reply/objection nor appeared before the assessing officer for hearing on the provisional assessment order and avoided payment of assessment amount. Further, in order to avoid payment of the above assessment order, he filed the above vexatious case with all false and frivolous allegations which is not tenable. What so ever, the complainant is liable to pay the amount as per assessment order. As he is an intentional evader and no kind of harassment or losses has been caused to him, he is not entitled to any relief as prayed for. The assertions made in para-8 are true excepting the allegations made therein that the opposite parties did not hand over the written acknowledgment about the installation of meter and seal numbers to the complainant on his repeated demand and that the purchase receipt, meter testing reports and meter handed over to the O.P.No.1 for installation of meter and now said documents are with O.P.No.1. The complainant has made all such false and vexatious allegation which are not tenable. He shall put to strict proof of the same. The allegations made in para-9 are not true. To specifically contend, it is not true that without issuing any disconnection notice as per the Electricity Act and Code of 2004 and without showing any sufficient reasons to the complainant disconnected the power supply to his said new meter and that after intervention and reconciliation of the O.P.No.5, the O.P.No.1 received Rs.2000/- towards penal amount on 26.2.2013 and had restored his power supply. The complainant made all vexatious and misconceived allegations which are not tenable. The O.Ps made it clear that power supply of the complainant was never disconnected. The allegations asserted in paras-10,11 and 12 are all not true. It is not true that the O.P.No.1 in connivance with other O.Ps to harass intentionally issued the electricity bill to the complainant against the old meter since the bill period Feb’ 13 till date and that non issuance of correct electricity bill as per actual consumption is tantamount to negligence and rendering deficit in service and when the complainant inquired about the matter, the O.P.No.4 demanded illegal gratification to issue the revised, corrected and on the basis of actual consumption bill. In this connection the O.Ps submit that the meter of the complainant was found defective and shown average reading since November 2012 to May 2013 and thus his meter was replaced on 05.02.2013 bearing meter SL. No.354585. However due to work pressure and under inadvertence the fact of replacement of meter could not be transmitted to the I.T. center to upload the information of change of meter in system. So the bills could not be generated as per new meter consumption from the month of Feb 2013 and bills were continued to issue on the old data of defective meter and accordingly bills were raised on average consumption basis until the fact of change of meter has been uploaded in the billing process in the month of June 2013. As such, under such an inadvertence, the factum of change of meter has been belatedly mentioned and the bills were started issuing on actual meter reading basis from the month of June 2013 instead of Feb 2013. Such an inadvertence was never intentional but under oversight due to work pressure. What so ever the same inadvertence will be rectified after taking average of 03 months meter readings and the bills will be rectified accordingly without causing any loss or harassment to the consumer. Further bill revisions are made at Sub-Divisional level, so asking of gratification by the O.P.No.4 for revision of bill not appears to be true. As such, all the allegations averred are baseless and misconceived. The O.Ps have go no knowledge about the allegation made in para-13. The allegation made in paras-14, 15 and 16 may be true and non reply of the notice may be due to busy in field for rectification of breakdown or maintenance of power supply but never for any intentional latches. The allegations made in para-17, 19 and 20 are not true. It is not true that due to callousness and gross negligence to provide appropriate services as per Electricity laws, the complainant is facing untoward problems and harassing financially and losing the rebate and facing mental agonies which are uncountable and irreparable and that he deriving from right to live and that on account of deficient in services by the O.Ps he suffering from agonies mentally , financially and physically and that due to deficiency of services, the O.Ps are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation of Rs.5000/- per month from November 2012 and that they liable to pay litigation cost of Rs.10000/- to the complainant. It may be submitted that while revising his bills as per new meter reading, the consumer will avail the rebate and his apprehension of losing rebate not tenable. So his allegation of suffering from agonies mentally, financially and physically is baseless, frivolous and not tenable and thus he is not entitled to award of any compensation, cost or litigation expenses etc.
It would be worthwhile to mention her that, the complainant in the name of one Priyabrata Sahu as his tenant, applied for grant of 2nd connection to his house premises. So after necessary compliance of statutory requirements, on 16.05.2013 as per the direction of the O.P.No.4 when G.Papa Rao L.M-“C) had visited to the premises of the complainant to provide power supply to said tenant and on local inquiry, he could ascertained that no such tenant has been residing in the premises of complainant. Due to his such query the complainant was provoked and not only ill-treated to the said lineman but also forcibly snatched away the Energy meter and the poly carbonate seal (S228643) from his possession while he was preparing to give power supply to his premises. Inspite of requests, as he did not return the same articles, on 20.05.2013 another L.M.”C” namely M.R.Badatya had visited to his premises and asked the complainant to return the above said articles to enable him to give power supply. But, he outright refused to return the same. So, he could not give power supply and reported the matter to the O.Ps. Inspite of all sincere efforts made by the O.P.No.4 and his staff, they could not give power supply due to resistance of the complainant and non-recovery of their said articles from him, so also untraceable of any person in the name of Priyabrata Sahu. So, the O.P.No.4 reported the matter to the O.P.No.1 through his letter No. 229 dated 26.06.2013. At last when complainant did not return the above articles inspite of the requests made by the O.Ps, the O.P.No.4 lodged a report against him before the IIC , Town P.S. Berhampur and the matter has been ultimately taken up by the Energy P.S. vide their S.D. entry No. 497/27.6.2013. When, he got information about the same, he filed the above case so also made filing of CC. 117/2013 though said Priyabrata Sahu before this Hon’ble Forum with all false and vexatious allegations, to cause harassment and losses to the O.Ps. So the above cases are not tenable as per law and natural justice and the complainant is not entitled to any relief as prayed for. If any order adverse to the interest of O.Ps is passed, they will be put to heavy loss and difficulties. The O.Ps submitted that no deficiency of service, unfair trade practice, damage, loss or harassment in any way caused to the complainant at any time. So his allegations of suffering from agonies mentally, financially and physically is baseless, frivolous and not tenable and thus he is not entitled to award of any compensation, cost or litigation expenses etc. Hence the O.Ps prayed to dismiss the case with cost, in the best interest of natural justice.
4. On the date of hearing of the case, the learned counsels for both parties are present. We heard argument at length from parties and perused the complaint petition, version, written argument, citation and documents placed on the case record. It reveals that the complaint as well as the written version of the O.Ps has contained several complex issues both of facts and law.
Law is well settled in case of Niwas Spinning Ltd. and others versus Can Bank Mutual Fund and another reported in 2001 (3) CPR 163 (NC) that “when complaint raises complex issues both of facts and law and would require tremendous time for recording evidence, hearing and arguments, it can not be adjudicated before Consumer Forum”.
5. Further the complainant has also admitted that his house has been inspected by the Inspecting Authority of O.Ps and he has also been issued a Provisional Assessment order U/S 126 of I.E. Act, 2003 bearing No.623 dated 18.01.2013 for sum of Rs.16,039/- towards unauthorized use of electricity for “meter found tampered”. Hon’ble Supreme Court has settled the legal position in the case of U.P.Power Corporation Ltd. and ors versus Anis Ahmad reported in 2013 (3) CLT 227 (SC) it has been very specifically laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that a complaint against the assessment made by assessing officer U/S 126 or against offence committed U/s 135 to 140 of Electricity Act, 2003 is not maintainable before Consumer Forum.
6. Considering the factual position of the case, the complainant’s case is dismissed against the O.Ps and the complainant is at liberty to file his complaint before any other Forum having competent jurisdiction for redressal of his grievance and he may avail the benefits under Section 14 of the Limitation Act 1963 in the best interest of justice.
The order is pronounced on this day of 25th April 2018 under the signature and seal of this Forum. The office is directed to supply copy of order to the parties free of cost and a copy of same be sent to the server of
