Ld. Lawyers of both the parties are present.  Fact remains in this case an application was filed by the OP CESC challenging the maintainablility of this case on the ground complainant filed this instant complaint challenging the provisional assessment made by the Assessing Officer (OPs) u/s.126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and admittedly the provisional assessment was made on 04-12-2013 u/s.126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for payment of Rs.3,372/-.  Its charges payable for unauthorized use of electricity and at the same time it was gratified by the order of the final assessment made u/s.127 of the Electricity Act, on 20-12-2013 and in view of the reported ruling in 2014(1) CPR 106 N.C. and in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court the Consumer Forum is debarred to take to decide in dispute in respect of any assessment made u/s.126 and 135 to 145 of Electricity Act, 2003 and in view of the above the present complaint is not maintainable and this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide the same.  Against that objection has been filed by the complainant.

        Accordingly, the maintainability petition is taken up for final hearing.  Heard Ld. Lawyers of both the parties.

        On proper consideration of the entire complaint it is found that the assessment was made by the Assessment Officer u/s.126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and when that amount had not been paid so the disconnection was made by the OP.

        Further considering the argument of the Ld. Lawyer and        it is found that complainant has stated that OP Company failed to prove the alleged charges of unauthorized use of electricity then it is clear that there was inspection held by the OP and OP found illegal consumption of electricity and finally from the order dated 20-12-2013 of Assessment Officer it is clear that Rajesh Kumar Singh is indulging in unauthorized electricity by extending supply to energy to a disconnected consumer, the supply to meter No.4450112 and for which Assessment Officer after inspection came to a conclusion holding such inspection on 04-12-2013 that electricity had been provided from the subject service installation being catered through the domestic rate meter no.4450112 to Chandrasekhar Singh who supplied electricity disconnection on 03-03-2010 and such act on the part of the complainant was an unauthorized use of Electricity and for which it was disconnected.

        In this regard Ld. Lawyer for the complainant submitted one ruling reported in 2014 CHN CAL 465 and argued that as per decision of the Hon’ble High Court said principle can be applied for registering the electricity and fact remains present complainant was not defaulter.  So, there was no cause for assessment of any bill and moreover no criminal proceedings were started by the OP so the entire objection regarding maintainability case as filed by the OP must be rejected.

        In this regard we have gone through ruling reported in 2013 (3) CPR 670 Supreme Court and after considering the said judgment and spirit of the judgment we have gathered that any act of the electricity as per provision of Section 126 and 135 to 140 of Electricity Act, 2003 cannot be challenged before the Consumer Forum and Consumer Forum has no legal authority to decide such dispute and practically para 47 of the judgment is very vital and wherever we have gathered that any assessment made by the Assessment Officer u/s.126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 cannot be challenged before Forum and Forum has no authority to decide the same but only the Electricity Tribunal has authority to decide it or their appellate authority. 

        Considering the final order of the Assessment Officer we have gathered that practically during inspection 14-12-2013 it was fact that Rajesh Kumar Singh was supply electricity to one person of the same holding whose electric connection had been disconnected by the CESC          on 03-03-2010 and it was no doubt an unauthorized use of electricity both by Rajesh Kumar Singh and Chandrasekhar Singh and fact remains final order of assessment passed by the  Assessment Officer on 20-12-2013 u/s.126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 cannot be challenged before this Forum and when there is sufficient material on the hand of the OP at the time of inspection that Chandrasekhar Singh whose electric connection was disconnected by CESC on 30-03-2010 was enjoying electricity from the meter of Rajesh Kumar Singh that means Rajesh Kumar Singh was selling electricity to Chandrasekhar Singh.  So, it is no doubt unauthorized use of electricity which comes under the purview of theft and in view of the above fact we are convinced to hold after relying upon the above ruling reported in 2013 (3) CPR 670 Supreme Court that the present complaint is not maintainable and the Forum has no jurisdiction to decide the dispute when negligent and deficiency on the part of the OP is not the subject matter of this case but entire matter shall be decided b y the Electricity Tribunal and complainant must have to bear before this Forum for relief but due to bar as agreed by the above judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court we are convinced that this complaint is not tenable and not maintainable before this Forum and accordingly the objection filed by the OP on 28-02-2014 bears merit and succeeds.

Hence,

Ordered

That the case be and the same is not maintainable in the eye of law and in view of the bar as agreed by the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 2013 (3) CPR 670 Supreme Court.

          Accordingly this complaint is dismissed as same is not maintainable.