Present         (1)      Nisha Nath Ojha,   

                              District & Sessions Judge (Retd.)                                                                                President

                    (2)      Sri Sheo Shankar Prasad Singh,

                              Member                 

Date of Order : 07.07.2015

                    Sri Sheo Shankar Prasad Singh

1. In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite parties:-

1. To pay Rs. 25,000/- for mental agony and torture and expenditure incurred in running to the office of the opposite party.
2. Loss incurred by children Rs. 10,000/-.
3. Loss incurred by Kaushal Praveen Rs. 25,000/-.
4. Loss incurred by Shaheen begum Rs. 50,000/-.
5. Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost.

2. Brief facts of the case which led to the filing of complaint are as follows:-

1. In this case the opposite party B.S.E.B, Patna was directed to make inspection of the premises of the complainant regarding Electrical Consumption and present status of meter installed in the house of complainant in presence of the complainant or his family members, because earlier report submitted by Board in February / April 2012 was a flimsy and suspicious report without having signature of the complainant or his family members.
2. Though as many as eight dates have elapsed but neither the premises was inspected nor report was submitted.
3. 26.03.2012 was last date and the complainant was present on the date but the Board was absent and the next date has been fixed on 04.07.2013 for submitting report and hearing of the case.
4. The complainant has also got a commercial consumption and there are four rooms in the premises in which small shop keepers are having their shops.
5. Due to differences in billing and also because the commercial meter of the complainant was defective and complainant were filed to remove the defective meter and submits the correct bill, due to which the connection of the commercial line was disconnected and still there is no commercial connection in the house of the complainant and the shop keepers are doing their business without electricity causing them great hardship and loss and they have also threatened that if their electricity connection is not restored they may vacate the complainant’s premises, that may cause great loss to the complainant.
6. The complainant respectfully suggest that the commercial connection of the complainant’s house may be restored on the condition that the opposite party may be directed to calculate the load in the four shops and they may further calculate the monthly consumption and fix a tentative charges to which the complainant is ready and agree to pay the said charges without being any prejudice to the merit of the case.
7. It is also humanitarian desire to consider the great measures of the shop keepers in this summer days and considering the hottest days is being passed these days.
8. It is desirable in the interest of natural justice that the date should be record and it may be heard in nay days in the first week of the may.

3. The Opposite Parties in their written statement has submitted as follows :-

1. The very first instance, it s stated that he present complaint is not maintainable before the learned District Forum as the complainant has suppressed the material facts from this learned Forum that on inspection of the complainant’s premises it was found that the complainant was having four number of shops in the premise which was being availed through D/S Connection of the complainant as such there was malpractice in the premises of the complainant by way of which the energy was consumed in the higher tariff.
2. It is stated that the complainant ha two electric connections in his premises- the first is NDS-II (A/c No. 137396) and the second one is DS-II (A/c No. 51952). The electric line concerning NDS-II connection has no dispute as it was earlier disconnected for non payment of electric bill in May 2000 and was reconnected in June 2006 when final bill was prepared and sae paid by the complainant.
3. The complainant’s other account with DS-II connection was showing bill as per the ledger for the month of January and February for total units consumed 220 (35,385-35165) and the total amount to be paid was for Rs. 3525.25/- as per electric bill dated 02.03.2003. Thereafter for March 2003 the units consumed was 125 (35510-35385) and the amount to be paid as per bill including arrears for Rs. 3886.06/-.
4. A general inspection was conducted in December 2002 of many premises to check malpractice including that of the complainant’s premises, whereby it was found that the complainant was having shops in his premises which were availing electricity from the DS-II connection of the complainant. The report was made on 15.03.2003 as also on 27.03.2003 whereby the complainant’s case was at Sr. No. 20. Accordingly Board made punitive charges for Rs. 6,379/- in NDS-II category of tariff and thereafter billing was being made from April 2003 onwards on the basis of NDS-II category. The complainant however failed to pay the bill and continued using the electricity uninterruptedly. At last the line was disconnected on 21.06.2005 on a total outstanding amount of Rs. 49,159.39 up to June 2006 and from July 2005 the making of billing stood stopped.
5. After one year of disconnection the complainant filed complaint case no. 263 of 2006 before the learned District Forum, Patna for rectification of bill demanding the bill to be made on the basis of DS-II category of tariff.
6. During the pendency of the case the complainant requested for OTS Scheme floated by Board for full and final settlement of the Bill. The Board accordingly waved DPS of Rs. 15,407/- and after deducting the same from total billed amount of Rs. 52,325/- and net demand of Rs. 36,918/- was made as per OTS Scheme. But the complainant did not pay the bill.
7. The complaint case was required to be disposed off in the light of the OTS Scheme being availed by the complainant in the mean time the learned District Forum, Patna passed interim order dated 22.08.2006 directing the opposite parties to issue electric bill on the basis of domestic service (DS-II) of tariff till the date of electric disconnection as 21.06.2005 and further to give electric line within three days after taking charge of RC/DC and the same having been paid by the complainant. The learned Forum adjourned the case for hearing that for claim of opposite parties for NDS-II category of billing.
8. The opposite parties preferred Revision No. 25/06 before the Hon’ble State Commission against the interim order dated 22.08.2006 passed by the learned District Forum, Patna in complaint case no. 263 of 2006 which was stayed on 15.09.2006 fixing complainant’s appearance. However, the Revision Petition was heard and the same was dismissed as the Hon’ble commission observed that the learned Forum has fixed the case for hearing on the point of merit and that the impugned order was interim in nature.
9. After dismissal of the revision Petition by the Hon’ble State Commission, the opposite parties complied the interim order dated 15.09.2006 as provisional bill dated 18.12.2006 was issued on that basis for Rs. 29,737.14/- which was paid and the line was restored.
10. On the basis of the above facts that there was inspection in the premises of complainant whereby the shops in the premises were found using energy from DS-II connection of the complainant, the claim of opposite parties making electric bill on the basis of NDS-II tariff is bonafide and as per the tariff and the bill dated June 2005 made under NDS-II category is justified and correct, and the same requires to be confirmed.

From the fact which have been placed before us by way of complaint petition and subsequent submission of the complainant it appears that complainant was having two electric line connection one domestic and other commercial.

With regard to the domestic connection it has been submitted by the complainant that the meter in question has already been replaced and the electric line is functioning properly.

With regard to the commercial connection it has been submitted that electric meter thereof was defective one and complainant’s made application for removal of that defective meter and submission of correct electric consumption bill but unfortunately the connection of commercial line was disconnected.

Now, through application dated 27.04.2013 made a prayer for restoration of commercial connection with condition that the opposite party may be directed to recalculate the load of the commercial establishment and further calculate the monthly consumption and fix a tentative charge to which complainant ready to pay it without any prejudice.

11.  A general inspection was conducted in December 2002 of many premises to check malpractice including that of the complainant’s premises, whereby it was found that the complainant was having shops in his premises which were availing electricity from the DS-II connection of the complainant. The report was made on 15.03.2003 as also on 27.03.2003 whereby the complainant’s case was at Sr. No. 20. Accordingly Board made punitive charges for Rs. 6,379/- in NDS-II category of tariff and thereafter billing was being made from April 2003 onwards on the basis of NDS-II category. The complainant however failed to pay the bill and continued using the electricity uninterruptedly. At last the line was disconnected on 21.06.2005 on a total outstanding amount of Rs. 49,159.39 up to June 2006 and from July 2005 the making of billing stood stopped.
12. After one year of disconnection the complainant filed complaint case no. 263 of 2006 before the learned District Forum, Patna for rectification of bill demanding the bill to be made on the basis of DS-II category of tariff.

On the basis of the above facts that there was inspection in the premises of complainant whereby the shops in the premises were found using energy from DS-II connection of the complainant, the claim of opposite parties making electric bill on the basis of NDS-II tariff is bonafide and as per the tariff and the bill dated June 2005 made under NDS-II category is justified and correct, and the same requires to be confirmed.

We have gone through the entire record of the case and heard the complainant only as opposite party Electricity Board was not present at the time of hearing.

Taking all the aspect of the matter in consideration we are not in agreement with the contention of the complainant made in complaint petition and subsequent petition filed on behalf of the complainant that commercial line be restored as the opposite party Electricity Board on the basis of inspection has found the complainant using the domestic line for commercial purpose. On the basis of the above facts that there was inspection in the premises of complainant whereby the shops in the premises were found using energy from DS-II connection of the complainant, the claim of opposite parties making electric bill on the basis of NDS-II tariff is bonafide and as per the tariff and the bill dated June 2005 made under NDS-II category is justified and correct, and the same cannot be interfered with by the forum.

Accordingly, We did not find any merit in the case and the same is dismissed.

However the complainant is at liberty to agitate the matter for restoration of commercial line before the appropriate authority under the Electricity Act 2003 and if such petition is made before them it is expected that authorities concerned will decide the matter expeditionary.

With the aforesaid observation this complaint case is dismissed.

                                                  Member                                                             President