Despite service of notice on the wife of the respondent, no one appears for the Respondent. This revision petition under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, “The Act”), filed by Uttar Haryana Vitran Nigam Ltd., is directed against order dated 06.09.2007, passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Panchkula (for short ‘‘the State Commission’’) in Appeal No.101 of 2003. By the impugned order, the State Commission has dismissed the Appeal filed by the Petitioner against order dated 05.12.2002 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kurukshetra (for short “the District Forum”) in Compliant No.97 of 1999. The District Forum had allowed the Complaint; set aside the impugned notice Annexure R5 served upon the Complainant -3- by Opposite Parties and directed the Opposite Parties not to charge the said amount of Rs.54,968/- from the Complainant. Opposite Parties were further directed to restore the electric connection of the Complainant within a period of 7 days of receipt of copy of the order, if it had been disconnected for want of the impugned amount on account of penalty imposed upon him. In our opinion, in light of the Authoritative pronouncement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited And Others vs. Anis Ahmad, (2013 8 SCC 491) wherein it has been held that where on allegation of theft of electricity, an order of assessment under Section 126 or action under Sections 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003, is initiated, a Complaint under the Act would not be maintainable, the Revision Petition merits acceptance. In the present case, it has been observed by the State Commission that on 24.03.1999 the premises of the Complainant was checked by the Sub Inspector of Vigilance in the company of SH. R. K. Batra, Junior Engineer (F) and other staff of the Opposite Parties. The seals of the meter were found tampered with and for that reason the meter was removed and taken into possession as per the procedure prescribed. -4- Thereafter it was sent to the laboratory. During the test by the M&T lab of the Opposite Parties a hole was found in the meter body in addition to the tempering of M&T seals of the meter. Taking it a case of theft of energy penalty amount of Rs.54,968/- was determined for which a notice bearing memo No.511/SPLCA dated 31.03.1999 was served upon the Complainant. The ratio of the aforesaid decision is on all fours to the facts of the instant case and therefore, the Complaint under the Act was itself not maintainable. Consequently, the Revision Petition is allowed; orders of the fora below are set aside and the Complaint is ordered to be dismissed with no order as to costs. It will be open to the Respondent to avail of any other legal remedy as may be available to him, if so advised. | 
