West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/115/2013

Sk. Year Ali - Complainant(s)

Versus

Asstt. Engineer, Birsingha C.C.C., W.B.S.E.D.C.L - Opp.Party(s)

08 Jan 2014

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

 

 Complaint case No.115/2013                                                  Date of disposal: 08/01/2014.                              

 BEFORE : THE HON’BLE PRESIDENT :  Mr. Sri Sujit kumar Das.

                                                      MEMBER :  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

                                                      MEMBER :  Mr.  Kapot Chattopadhayay

    For the Complainant/Petitioner/Plaintiff : Md. S.A Haque. Advocate.

    For the Defendant/O.P.S.                           : Mr. D. P. Das Mahapatra.  Advocate.

          

                 Sk. Year Ali, S/o late Sk. Golam Ali, Vill-Solageria, P.O.-Chaklachipur,                                                                                    

                 P.S.- Ghatal, Dist Paschim Medinipur………………Complainant.

                                                              Vs.

1. Asstt. Engineer, Birsingha C.C.C., W.B.S.E.D.C.L, Vill & P.O.- Birsingha,                              

      P.S.-Ghatal, Dist-Paschim Medinipur

2. The Chairman, W.B.S.E.D.C.L, Bidyut Bhaban, Salt-Lake City,                                           

      Kolkata-700091………………………………..…Ops.

 

                  Case of the complainant Sk. Year Ali, in short, is that he is a marginal farmer having landed property for cultivation.   He installed a mini deep tubewell therein with electric connection bearing consumer no.L520651 with load capacity of 5H.P.  Initially the electric bill was normal for about ten years.  But subsequently after the transformer  having been burnt out by fire on 12/09/2012, the electric bill for the month of March 2013 was raised for 12,000/-(Twelve thousand) only.  Being aggrieved by the said bill, the complainant moved before the Op W.B.S.E.D.C.L., Birsingha stating the alleged fact of defective meter.  After that the Op sent next bill for April 2013 raising Rs.18,106/- (Eighteen thousand one hundred six) only, for May 2013,  1,547/-(Fifteen hundred forty seven) only, June 2013 for 113/-(One hundred thirteen) only and August 2013  53,383/-(Fifty three thousand three hundred eighty three) only which are all illegal, baseless, false and fraudulent.  The complainant further alleged that Op has illegally disconnected the supply of electric connection.  Complainant repeatedly requested them to correct the electric meter and to cancel the impugned bills.  Through the case, the complainant prays for passing necessary order for installation of a correct meter with restoration of service connection and also to cancel the disputed electric bills.

     Contd………….P/2

              

                                                                                                           - ( 2 ) -

               Op-W.B.S.E.D.C.L. contested the case by filing written objection challenging that the complainant has no cause of action for presentation of this petition of complaint.  The entire case is categorically denied by the Op and as such prayed for dismissal of this case.

               

                  In connection with the case, certain documents in Xerox copies are filed on admission of the correctness of the contents appearing therein from the end of respective parties.

              

                  For the purpose of an effective decision of this case certain relevant issues are framed which are as follows:

 

1. Whether the complainant has any cause of action for filing this case?
2. Whether the electric meter was defective at the material point of time as raised by the complainant?
3. Whether the electric bills were prepared on the basis of correctly functioning electric meter?
4. If so whether the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for?

 

Decision with reasons :

 Issue Nos.1 to 4 :

    

             All the issues are taken up together for discussion on the ground that the same are closely related to the point of dispute appearing in the case.  Ld. Advocate for the complainant made his argument that it is a clear case against the Op-W.B.S.E.D.C.L. that the electric meter was not functioning properly and this fact of defective meter has already been admitted by them in the electric bills where they have raised inflated amount.  This fact of defective electric meter does not support and justify the excess amount as raised against the complainant.  Despite repeated persuasion, the Op did not pay any steps for the purpose of modification of the disputed electric bills.  On the contrary, they have disconnected the supply of electricity to the complainant which is very much repugnant to the lawful duty of the Op in giving service to the consumer.  Apart from that Ld. Advocate further argued that the alleged fact of burnt out condition of the transformer was already within the knowledge of the Op.  Moreover, on 12/03/2013 the matter of non-functioning of electric meter was reported to them.  But till date the Op has not taken any favourable steps for restoration of supply of electricity to the complainant.  In conclusion, it is submitted by the Ld. Advocate that there is clear case of deficiency in service on the part of the Op and as such

Contd………….P/3

              

- ( 3 ) -

necessary direction may be given to them in terms of the prayer mode in the complaint.

    

                 Ld. Advocate for the Op-W.B.S.E.D.C.L. made his reply to the argument of the complainant that the complainant is badly failure to make out his case against the Op.  In the entire case of the complainant there is no such whisper as regard to the allegation of deficiency in service nor is there any statement expressing that the complainant suffers due to deficiency in service  committed by the W.B.S.E.D.C.L..  The Op rather upon the grievance of the complainant adopted necessary measures for checking the electric meter.  For this purpose, new meter was attempted to be installed in place of the disputed meter but the same could not be held due to serious objection raised by the complainant.  Necessary checking report appearing in the petition dated 19/08/2013 made by the complainant has been pointed out before us.  In addition, the Op considered the grievance of the complainant by constituting a committee consisting of Chairman, Member, Secretary and two Members and Station Manager.  After considering the grievance of the complainant, the committee passed a reasoned order on 06/09/2013 that a checked meter would be installed in respect of the alleged meter in terms of W.B.S.E.D.C.L. Regulation.  In this context, Ld. Advocate appearing for the Op has referred to the decision reported in the 2002(1) CPR296 and explained that the method of remedy in such a case of allegation relating to defective meter and its bill lies in the jurisdiction of Expart Committee.  Once the expert committee has considered the case of the complainant hereof, there is no further scope for raising the same issue before any other authority even before the Forum.  So according to him, the Forum has no jurisdiction to go into the matter any further.  The expert committee report does not suffer any sort of defect or irregularity and as such the Op cannot be blamed with deficiency in service.  Thus, the Complaint, according to the Ld. Advocate, has no cause of action for presentation of this Petition of Complaint.  Thus the case should be dismissed.

    

                    After careful consideration of the case of both parties, it appears that the complainant made the allegation that the meter was running defective and accordingly the bills in question based thereon are not justified.  In this context, the documentary evidence produced by the Op  to show that they have considered the grievance of the complainant by constituting an expart committee where the subject matter of the dispute was discussed by the members of the said committee and reasoned order was passed by them.  Further, it appears that the Op. has considered the  petition dated 19/08/2013 submitted by the complainant which has also been taken into account for technically checking  the disputed electric meter on 22/08/2013.  If that be so,  the Forum has it’s duty  to decide whether there was any deficiency in service in such a situation from the end of the Op.  Therefore, in this context, upon meticulous scrutiny of the evidence, we find there appears nothing but certain material evidence exposing that the dispute on meter as raised by the complainant has already been considered and decided by the appropriate authority of the op.

     Contd………….P/4

              

- ( 4 ) -

                      Under the facts and circumstances, it is very much explicit that the complainant had already availed of the alternative remedy before the expart committee constituted by the Op and the said authority has taken decision and as such the complainant as to our opinion cannot raise the same cause of action before this Forum.

                      In view of the discussion made hereinabove, there is no room left for us to say  that the Op is liable for deficiency in service.  Thus, it is decided that the complainant has no cause of action for filing the petition of complaint since the decision of the alternative authority  towards the claim of the complainant that governs the regularization of the electric bill in question.  Thus, all the issues are disposed of accordingly resulting no relief for the complainant as prayed for.

                              Hence

                                        It is ordered,

                                                            that the case be and the same is dismissed on context without cost.

 

 Dic. & Corrected by me

              

         President                                              Member                                               President

                                                                                                                              District Forum

                                                                                                                           Paschim Medinipur.