CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110 016

Case No.396/2008

SH. SUSHIL KUMAR

S/O SH. YAQOOB MASIH,

R/O C-225, VILLAGE-CHIRAG DELHI,

NEW DELHI

…………. COMPLAINANT                                                                                     

                                                VS.

M/S BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD.,

BSES BHAWAN, NEHRU PLACE,

NEW DELHI-110019

THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

      …………..RESPONDENT

                                                                                             Date of Order: 08.04.2016

O R D E R

A.S. Yadav – President

The case of the complainant is that he is a registered consumer of   electricity connection bearing New K.No.2520G5071991.  On 21.01.2008 the said meter was replaced with a new meter as a routine change and at that time no irregularity or defect was pointed out against the said connection.  The premises was again inspected on 25.01.2008 and everything was found within the sanctioned limit.  On 18.03.2008 officials of OP alongwith CISF personnel and local police officials visited the premises of the complainant and inspected the meters installed at the ground floor near the main gate which was open for inspection.  After the inspection the officials found the meters in good and satisfactory working condition.  When one of the family members of complainant asked to one of the officials of OP to show his identity and reason of frequent visit and inspection of meter the official of OP namely Mr. Rajiv Garg became angry and started abusing in filthy language.  After about three weeks an envelope was received containing the copy of alleged assessment of connected load and inspection report.  On perusal of the same it was shocking to find that it has been alleged that an inspection was conducted on 18.03.2008 and connected load was found 8.383 KW and there was an illegal wire which was connected with service line joint at first floor and when the inspection team was reached, the consumer removed the wire.  The allegations levelled in the inspection report are false.  In fact no inspection report was prepared at the site.  OP served two notices to complainant under section 126 of the Electricity Act and thereafter under section 156 of the Electricity Act.  And thereafter raised a bill for a sum of Rs.2,83,476/-.  It was also mentioned in the notice u/s 56 of the Electricity Act that the consumer was found indulged in direct theft of electricity.  It is submitted that the bill of Rs.2,83,476/- raised by OP is illegal and unlawful and unjust.  It is prayed that OP be directed to withdraw the demand notices and pay a compensation of Rs.1 lakh for harassment.

OP in the reply took the plea that the complaint under reply is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed as this Forum has not jurisdiction to entertain as per the mandate of Sec. 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003 which is reproduced herein, Sec. 145 “Civil Court not to have jurisdiction – No civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter which an assessing officer referred to in Sec. 126 or an appellate authority referred to in Sec 127 ………”.

An inspection at the premises was carried out by Division Enforcement Inspection Team alongwith CISF staff and Delhi Police on 18.03.2008 where the complainant was found indulging in Direct Theft of Electricity by way of illegal means i.e. tapping direct supply from BSES Service Line through illegal wires unauthorizedly.  A load of 8.383 KW(NX) was being used at first and second floors by complainant for non-domestic purpose i.e. embroidery work was running directly on BSES system  As such complaint was booked for Direct Theft of Electricity as per the Electricity Act, 2003.  Meter bearing nos.23723633 and 23723629 were found totally bypassed.

We have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record.

The matter in question is covered under the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors. Vs Anis Ahmed, 111(2013) CPJ 1(SC) where it was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that person who is found indulging in theft of electricity is not a consumer within the meaning of Consumer Protection Act. 

In view of the above, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as the complainant was found indulging in direct theft of electricity.  A speaking order has been passed by the Enforcement Cell which itself shows that the complainant was indulged in unauthorized use of electricity and he was using electricity for non-domestic purposes.  The penal tariff was imposed u/s 126 of the Electricity Act. 

Keeping in view the above facts, complainant is not a consumer hence the complaint is dismissed.

            Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.

             (D.R. TAMTA)                                                         (A.S. YADAV)

                 MEMBER                                                               PRESIDENT