DATE OF FILING : 28.10.2009
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI Dated this the 25th day of February, 2010
Present: SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER C.C No.210/2009 Between Complainant : S.Packiaselvam, Sevenmally – New Munnar Division, Letchmi Estate, Munnar P.O, Idukki District. And Opposite Parties : 1. The Dy. General Manager, Letchmi Estate, Munnar P.O, Idukki District. 2. The Manager, Engineering Department, KDHP Company Private Limited, Munnar P.O, Idukki District. (Both by Adv: P.J.Kurian) O R D E R SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)
Complainant is a worker under the opposite parties, entitled for free housing and such other facilities as contemplated by the Plantation Labour Act and Rules. As per the classification, she comes under Class VIII, entitled for free electricity, below 20 units and if the consumption is above 20 units, she is liable to pay for the full units consumed as per the scheme of the Government. Being a permanent worker with family, she is entitled for a full unit accommodation, consists of a big room and kitchen, with side bathroom and latrine outside the unit. Here in the case of the complainant, only one big room was allotted to her and the kitchen portion consists of the kitchen, bath room and latrine, was given to another worker. As such, there ought to be two metres, but only one provided to the unit, that is inside the big room of the complainant. The complainant is using only one bulb, and a plug point from which she avails supply for the TV. Except the TV there is no electrical items in the house. The consumption of the occupant in the kitchen portion is having 3 light points and a plug point, but no meter provided, thereby his consumption will be accounted in the meter provided to the complainant's meter only, thereby the privilege of free electricity is denied. Being a worker under the opposite parties, the electricity charges were recovered direct from the monthly salary of the complainant. The meter reading was recovered from her salary each month, including the consumption by the kitchen side occupier. As per the instructions of the Field Officer, the kitchen side occupier pays 50% of the electricity charges direct to the complainant as the share of his consumption. This was accepted by the complainant also. The kitchen side occupier Sri.Boopathy vacated the same since he was allotted with a full unit and then the kitchen portion was given to one Sri.Premkumar during December 2008. Sri.Premkumar refused to pay the current charges though he avails the power supply and thereby the complainant was forced to pay the current charges for his room. This fact was also brought to the notice of the Field Officer and also the Ist opposite party, but no action taken till this date. The Ist opposite party is duty bound to issue bills of each month for the consumption made and also issue receipts for the amount paid. But, herein the case of this area, no bill issued to the workers, no receipts issued, but the amount will be recovered from the wages, as electricity charges. Due to an accident in the course of employment the complainant was injured and she is under treatment. Due to the pain and inability she could not attend regular work and the subject matter is pending as an industrial dispute before the Deputy Labour Officer, Munnar as ID NO.330/2006. On 10th August 2009, the Ist opposite party intimated that an amount of Rs.10,337.73 is due as current charges in the account of the complainant and directed to remit the said amount on or before 17th August, 2009, failing which the power supply would be disconnected. This was replied by the complainant stating that no bill issued till this date and as per the wage slip, the current charges are recovered from the salary and it is admitted that there is check roll debit. Further, she requested for a detailed bill and also sent Rs.1,000/- by money order as part payment of current charges. The money order was refused and the power supply disconnected on 25th August, 2009, in spite of persistent requests in person also for a bill to pay up. Again the matter was brought to the notice of the Ist opposite party vide letter dated Ist September, 2009. On 12th September 2009, the Ist opposite party intimated the details of the bill and accordingly the current charges claimed as Rs.5058.40 was remitted under DD for Rs.5,200/- dated 22.09.2009. The power supply was restored on 28.09.2009, but no receipt issued for the amount collected till this date. No action was taken to verify and provide a clear statement of accounts or to compensate the excess amount collected from the complainant. The complainant was entitled for free electricity, being a low slab consumer, that benefit also denied. The disconnection of power supply was highly affected and put to much hardships, since her daughter was bed ridden, no light inside the room, in total darkness even in the day time and the kerosene smoke affected her lungs. The service of the complainant is dispensed with, her due benefits including compensation is due in the hands of the opposite parties, there was only check roll balance that is due to them as according to the opposite party since the current charges are transferred to the check roll account. The check roll account includes, recovery for the EPF, LIC, firewood etc, and under cover of the provisions of the Indian Electricity(Supply) Act, 1910. The issue of bill and receipt is mandatory as per the provisions of the Act and so this petition is filed for deficiency in service of the opposite party for disconnection of the electric supply of the complainant.
2. The opposite party filed a written version stating that the complaint is not maintainable before this Forum. There is a Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum constituted by M/s.KDHP Company Private Limited which is the licensee in charge of the distribution of electricity in KDH village. The complainant is coming within the jurisdiction of the above Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum and as a consumer her grievances can be raised before the above Forum and got the same redressed. It is admitted that the complainant is a permanent worker of New Munnar Division of Lechmi Estate. She was provided with a big room in the line unit for her living accommodation and the kitchen portion was allotted to another worker. The line unit is provided with electricity and the complainant is consuming electricity in the building and she is bound to pay electricity charges as per the meter reading recorded every month used by her, in excess of the free units consumed. The complainant has not turned up for work for a long period. The accumulation of her check roll debit has gradually gone up due to recovery of monthly electricity charges etc. and she has not bothered to remit her check roll debit balance even though she had been advised on several occasions to settle the debit balance of her check roll account. As on 31st July 2009 she had a check roll balance of Rs.10337.73 including the electric charges of Rs.5045.55 for the period from December 2004 to July 2009 and she was informed by a letter dated 12.09.2009 to remit her debit balance on or before 21st September 2009 failing which the power supply to her line unit allotted would be disconnected. After receiving the above letter she has sent an amount of Rs.1,000/- by money order. The same is returned to her since the entire amount of Rs.5045.55 as electric charges was not paid. Hence the power supply was disconnected and after that she has sent a DD for Rs.5,200/- towards her electric bill on 26.09.2009 and power supply was restored to her line unit on receipt of the above DD. The employees in the estate have been issued with a copy of the pay slip every month through the muster in which details of earnings, deductions, carried over debit balance etc. have been clearly shown. Individual electric bill also being issued every month through the muster to all employees. It is the responsibility of the employees to collect the same from the muster. There is no complaint raised by the complainant regarding the non-allotment of single house etc. which are the matters to be looked into by Inspector of Plantations. There is no illegal disconnection of electricity. Power supply to the line unit is disconnected after due notice and the opposite parties are entitled to disconnect electricity of any consumer who defaults in paying the current charges. No loss is sustained by the complainant due to disconnection of electricity and the petition is liable to be dismissed.
3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?
4. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P8(series) marked on the side of the complainant and the oral testimony of DW1 and Exts.R1 and R2(series) marked on the side of the opposite parties.
5. The POINT :- The petition is filed for getting compensation for the illegal disconnection of the power supply of the complainant. The complainant was examined as PW1. As per PW1, a notice was issued by the opposite party on 10.08.2009 stating that there was a check roll balance of Rs.10337.73 is pending on her check roll account as unrecovered debit as on 31st July, 2009 and it was advised to remit the above check roll debit balance on or before 17th August 2009 failing which the power supply would be disconnected, which is marked as Ext.P1. PW1 replied the same stating that the subject matter is pending as industrial dispute under No.330/2006 before the Deputy Labour Officer, Munnar. No bill is issued or the details of consumption was not given or no demand notice was issued from the part of opposite party to remit the amount of electricity. But the opposite party was claimed as a check roll debit to the tune of Rs.10337.73. So PW1 was not able to pay the amount and a part payment was done as Rs.1,000/- by way of money order. It was refused by the opposite party. The reply letter and the copy of the money order receipt are marked as Ext.P2(series). Another letter was issued by the complainant stating that the complainant is residing in the portion of the big room and the balance portion which consists of the kitchen, bathroom and latrine was given to another person for accommodation. There is no separate meter fixed for the electrical energy. So the consumption made by the partner of the room also levied on the complainant till date, letter is marked as Ext.P4. Then a letter was issued by the opposite party to the complainant on 12th September 2009 stating that the electricity charge of the complainant is Rs.5058.40 which is marked as Ext.P5 and the total bill also provided which is marked as Ext.P5(a). PW1 again replied to the opposite party stating that the occupation of one room is only provided to the complainant, wherein one bulb and a TV is using by the complainant. In fact the kitchen portion of the room was occupied by another person, where there are 3 plug points and 3 bulbs. Again the complainant sent a DD of Rs.5,200/- for the due of current charges, the letter is marked as Ext.P6. Complainant's electric connection was disconnected on 25.08.2009 because of the non-payment of the electricity bill. Bill was not issued to the complainant as per the provisions of the Electricity Act. So the bill was not paid by PW1. Upto 20 units, the electricity is free to the workers. The complainant only used 15 units electricity per month. Only one bill is issued by the opposite party for an amount of about Rs.10,000/-. The co-occupant has paid only Rs.320-/- to the complainant. This matter was also intimated to the opposite party. The power supply was disconnected on 29/08/2009. The opposite party was examined as DW1. Copy of the electricity bills(6 Nos) were produced and is marked as Ext.R2(Series) and the monthly pay slip of the complainant is marked as Ext.R1(series). DW1 deposed that the complainant was not appeared for her work from 2004 onwards and a charge sheet was given to her for the same. There is an industrial dispute pending before the Deputy Labour Officer, Munnar regarding light work was not provided to the complainant. A petition was filed to the Deputy Labour Officer, Munnar for that. Sanction is not yet received from that office. So the complainant is till an employee of the opposite party. Only one big room was given for her accommodation, a full unit was not given. The kitchen portion of the big room was given to another family. No separate electric meter was fixed in that room. But a separate meter was fixed in that room after the request of the complainant. The meter was fixed in October 2009. The co-occupant must pay 50% of the electricity charges to the complainant as per the mutual understanding. There was no dispute about that matter. At the end of every month, electricity bills are issued to the parties. Ext.P2(series) bills are issued for the period 31.03.2004 to 31.03.2005. The opposite party is duty bound to supply demand notice for disconnection to the complainant. Such a notice was issued as per DW1. But there is no evidence regarding the same. The first notice issued to the complainant is Ext.P1, wherein it is written that Rs.10337.73 is still pending on check roll account. The electricity charges were not mentioned in the first letter. After that the details were given.
As per the complainant the opposite party never issued clear account of electric consumption and bills for the same. The complainant was in medical leave from 2004 onwards and so she was not able to get the monthly bills issued by the opposite party with monthly payment slip including the monthly charge of electricity. Without issuing the electricity bill they only issued a letter stating that a huge amount is pending in her check roll account. No bill was given for electricity charges. So the complainant sent Rs.1,000/- as Money order but it was refused by the opposite party. Hence the complainant's connection was disconnected. The power supply was restored on 28.09.2009. As per the opposite party, they are sending monthly bills with the pay slips and the check roll debit including the electricity bill. The complainant is duly liable to pay the electricity charges used by her. In this case, Ext.P1 shows that Rs.10,000/- is still pending in the check roll account of the complainant and no mention of electricity charges in Ext.P1 notice. The detailed bill was issued as per the request of the complainant. The power supply was disconnected on 29.08.2009. On receiving the Ext.P1 bill the complainant sent Rs.1,000/- as money order but it was refused by the opposite party. In this case, the complainant was in medical leave due to an accident in the course of employment. The matter is pending as an industrial dispute. Without issuing proper bill, the opposite party disconnected the power supply, which is a gross deficiency in service from the part of the opposite party. The complainant is residing in a big room in which only one bulb and one TV is using. The kitchen portion is given for another person where there are 3 bulbs and 3 plug points were provided. No separate meter was fixed for that room. The co-occupant never pays the current charges to the complainant and the complainant is suffering the same. This matter was also reported to the opposite party but the opposite party never considered the request. At last they fixed two separate meter for 2 occupants. So the complainant has denied the benefit of free electricity within 20 units. As per the complainant she is using only one bulb and one TV which is below 20 units. That is not challenged by the opposite party. The complainant was kept in darkness for one month because of the lack of electricity and she was a patient who was suffering a lot because of kerosene smoke. So we think that Rs.3,000/- can be awarded for the mental agony caused to the complainant because of the act of the opposite party. Hence the petition allowed. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.3,000/- to the complainant for the mental agony caused to her due to the disconnection of electricity and Rs.2,000/- as cost of this petition within one month of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of default.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 25th day of February, 2010 Sd/- SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT) Sd/- I agree SMT.SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER) Sd/- I agree SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER) APPENDIX Depositions : On the side of Complainant : PW1 - Packiaselvam W/o Sakthi On the side of Opposite Parties : DW1 - Jeevan Raj Exhibits: On the side of Complainant: Ext.P1 - Letter dated 10.08.2009 issued by the Ist opposite party to the complainant Ext.P2(series) - Complainant's letter dated 12.08.2009 addressed to the Manager, Letchmi Estate, Munnar with Money Order Receipt Ext.P3 - Photocopy of Intimation regarding the return of Money Order for Rs.1,000/- Ext.P4 - Complainant's letter dated 1st September, 2009 addressed to the Manager, Letchmi Estate, Munnar Ext.P5(series) - Copy of the Ist opposite party's letter dated 12.09.2009 with detailed account Ext.P6 - Photocopy of complainant's letter dated 22.09.2009 addressed to the Ist opposite party Ext.P7 - Circular dated 18.11.2009 issued by Tata Tea Limited, Munnar on revision of tariff to LT Consumers Ext.P8(series) - Salary Slip in respect of the complainant for the month of September to December 2009(4 Nos) On the side of Opposite Parties : Ext.R1(series) - Monthly Pay Slip of the complainant Ext.R2(series) - Photocopy of Electricity Bills(6 Nos)
| | [HONORABLE Sheela Jacob] Member[HONORABLE Laiju Ramakrishnan] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE Bindu Soman] Member | |
