Consumer Complaint No.108 of 2014
Date of filing: 10.06.2014 Date of disposal:04.12.2014
Complainant: Sanatan Ghosh, Stadium Road, Prantik Para, P.O. & P.S.-Katwa, Dist.-Burdwan.
-VERSUS-
Opposite Party: 1. Asst. Engineer, Katwa C.C.C., Kachhari Road, P.O. & P.S.-Katwa,
District-Burdwan.
2. Divisional Engineer, WBSEDCL, Gandhi Market, P.O. & P.S.-Katwa,
District-Burdwan.
3. Regional Manager, R.G.R.O., Burdwan Region, Monimart, P.O. &
Dist-Burdwan.
4. Chairman, WBSEDCL, Vidyut Bhavan (8th floor) Sector-II, Salt Lake-91
Present : Hon’ble President: Sri Udayan Mukhopadhyay
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Silpi Majumder
Appeared for the Complainant: Complainant himself.
Appeared for the Opposite Parties: Ld. Advocate Biswanath Nag.
JUDGEMENT
This is an application U/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
The complainant’s short case is that he is a consumer of WBSEDCL since long. On 5.6.2012 the O.P., WBSEDCL a digital new meter was introduced at the complainant’s house prior information to him, though the old meter was in running condition. Within a few days the complainants seen that his electric consumption is being doubled though total number of electric points are same.
In that condition the complainant informed to the Asst. Engineer, Katwa Group WBSEDCL about genuiness of the meter. Accordingly WBSEDCL made an arrangement for testing of the digital meter and declared that the complainant’s meter is okay. The complainant alleged that the O.P., WBSEDCL could not clarify the check meter which was used to test.
Under this situation the complainant again put one application on 5.3.2013 to WBSEDCL for testing of digital meter by any Govt. organization or Jadavpur University at my own cost. It is unfortunate that WBSEDCL did not give any reply. Therefore, the complainant moved to District Consumer Office and came to know that there is no provision to test the meter by any outside organization according to WBSEDCL version. But O.P. did not produce any supporting documents regarding this. Finding no other alternative the complainant filed this case before this Ld. Forum for relief.
The O.P.s contested the case by filing written version, denying inter-alia all the material allegation as leveled against them. The O.P.s further stated that the complainant Sanatan Ghosh of Stadium Para, Prantikpara, P.O. & P.S.-Katwa, Dist.-Burdwan is a consumer having consumer ID No.515013449 and consumer No.A09392 under Katwa and the said connection was effected on 24.3.2002 with a load of .64 KV and since installation the energy bills have been raised as per reading shown in the installed meter. Subsequently as per norms of the WBSEDCL it is ordered by the Authority that all the conventional/hybrid meters are to be changed by new good static energy meters and in compliance of the above existing conventional meter having No.T1859273 on 5.6.2012 and thereafter energy bills were raised as per reading shown in the installed new meter i.e. as per actual consumption but the complainant after receipt of electric bill complaint against genuinity of the installed new static and to redress his grievance 2 Nos. check meters (tested by WBSEDCL) were installed in series with the existing meter on 7.9.2012 & 11.12.2012 respectively and the reading of the existing new meter and check meters are taken on different dates, details of which are given in separate sheet & meter reading which are filed herewith by separate firisti wherefrom it will be apparent that the performance of the existing new meter is okay and the same has been informed to the complainant on 2.9.2013. But the complainant knowing everything again has filed an application for the testing of the existing new meter by the University of Jadavpur. But as a matter of fact there is no such provision in the Electricity Act and the rules framed there under that in any case the meter is to be checked by Jadavpur University and as such being devoid of merit the instant case is fit to be dismissed. The O.P.s further stated that if there is any grievance against the correctness of a meter should be referred to the chief Electrical Inspector, Govt. of West Bengal and in case of bills or its payment that should be referred before the Regulatory Commission or before the person or authority empowered by the Electricity Act. Hence, the O.P.s prayed for dismissal of the instant case with cost.
Point for consideration in this case is;
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. in this case?
DECISION WITH REASON
We have sympathetically considered the inconvenience faces by the complainant after changing the old meter and thereby the energy bill raised high although the actual consumption is same, for which naturally complainant’s mind has clouded regarding the genuinity of the new meter, thereby he requested the authority concerned several time but after testing they have certified “okay”. But the complainant is not convinced with that service of the O.P., for which come before this Forum for replacement of defective meter and testing by government organization.
We have considered sympathetically the problem faced by the complainant. But the dispute is excess meter reading in a same consumption which was consumed at the time of old meter. We have perused the Section 162 of the Electricity Act 2003 , wherefrom it appears that “the Appropriate Government may, by notification, appoint duly qualified persons to be a Chief Electrical Inspector or Electrical inspector and every such Inspector so appointed shall exercise the powers and perform the functions of a Chief Electrical Inspector or an Electrical Inspector under this Act and exercise such other powers and perform such other functions as may be prescribed within such areas or in respect of such class of works and electric installations and subject to such restriction as the Appropriate Government may direct etc.”
In this regard Section 163 of the Act is very much relevant wherein the said persons having power of inspecting, testing, repairing or altering the electric supply-lines, meters, fittings, works and apparatus for the supply of electricity belonging to the licensee.
In the above discussion we find that Chief Electrical Inspector being a Government employee having powers to check meters and other electrical apparatus and lines. So, we refer the matter to the Chief Electrical Inspector, Vidyut Bhavan, Salt Lake for solving the dispute so that the complainant may get piece and relief in the matter since he has alleged excessive bill after installations of digital new meter.
With that observation it is
ORDERED
that the application U/s 12 of the C.P. Act is allowed in part on contest. The prayer for replacement of defective meter is refused at this stage because no authenticated documents before this Forum that the digital meter is defective. But the prayer for testing the meter appearing in the body of the complaint is allowed but not the expert of Jadavpur University. But should be by the persons so appointed by the Chief Electrical Inspector, Bidyut Bhavan Salt Lake, which will be more and more reliable when the Electricity Act, 2003 prescribed the same. Let the plain copy of this order be handed over all the parties free of cost. A plain copy of the order also sent to the Chief Electrical Inspector, Vidyut Bhavan for compliance in the light of the observation made in above. Complainant is directed to supply the address accordingly.
(Udayan Mukhopadhyay)
Dictated and corrected by me. President
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
(Udayan Mukhopadhyay)
President
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder)
Member
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
