JUDGEMENT

Subir Kumar Dass, Member– This consumer complaint under section 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant Sri Bimlesh Chowdhury against the O.p., named above alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.p.

      Complainant’s case, in brief, is as follows :-   

   The complainant is a permanent resident of the premises at 22, Mahendra Nath Roy Lane, Police Station and District – Howrah - 711101. Complainant is also a Consumer being Consumer No.5900119025 and having a Domestic Meter being No.3593688 and one industrial meter being Consumer No.59001109034 and meter no.4170461 under the CESC Limited i.e. O.p.

Complainant had another residence at 15/1, Radha Madhav Ghosh Lane, Police Station and District – Howrah as tenant and had a Domestic Electric Meter being Meter No.3219671 of Consumer No.58008148005.

Sometime in the month of May, 2009, the complainant alongwith his family members have shifted at the present residence at 22, Mahendra Nath Roy Lane, Police Station and District – Howrah – 711101 from their previous residence at 15/1, Radha Madhav Ghosh Lane, Police Station and District – Howrah and the complainant by a letter dated 28/05/2009 has intimated the Senior Commercial Executive, Howrah Regional Office, CESC Limited as Authority concern of the O.p. about not using electricity at 15/1, Radha Madhav Ghosh Lane, P.S. & District-Howrah under caption “Non Used of Meter”.

That subsequently on 19^th August, 2009 the complainant vide the notice of intimation with the caption “Surrender of Meter”  lodged to the Senior Commercial Executive, Howrah Regional Office, CESC Ltd. Howrah, whereby and whereon the complainant informed the CESC Ltd. as the O.p. herein that the said Meter being No.3219671 was surrendered with immediate effect and the said Notice was duly received by the CESC Ltd. by putting the Seal and Signature on 19^th August, 2009.

That all on a sudden the CESC Authority as O.p. herein issued a notice to the complainant by intimating that on inspection of the Service Installation at metering system to the supply of the said Meter in the name of the husband of the complainant at 15/1, Radha Madhav Ghosh Lane, Police Station and District – Howrah, it was allegedly found that terminal plate of Seal of the said Meter was tempered and simultaneously on 30/12/2013 disconnected the Electric Meter and fix the date for hearing on 16^th January, 2014.

On 16^th January, 2014 the CESC Authority as O.p. herein passed their final Order of Assessment, whereby and where on they falsely charged the sum of Rs.60,805/- to the complainant for alleged tampering as allegedly made by him, though complainant alongwith family member never stayed a single night at the said previous resident at 15/1, Radha Madhav Ghosh Lane, Police Station and District – Howrah.

That the complainant having two meters and the son of the complainant namely Subhas Chowdhury having another Electric Meter and his wife namely Rita Devi another commercial meter, lying and situated at 22, Mahendra Nath Roy Lane. Out of the said four meter one industrial, two domestic and one commercial meter.

That subsequently the CESC Authority alongwith its representative came to the present residential address of the complainant 22, Mahendra Nath Roy Lane with force to disconnect all the four meters, but they manage to disconnect the meter being No.4342892 as stands in the name of the son of the complainant by adopting such illegal, deliberate and in-human acts.

On service of notice, O.p. appeared and filed a petition challenging maintainability of the case. The said petition on being heard, was rejected by this Commission vide order dated 24/12/2014.

Thereafter, O.p. challenged the said order of rejection of his petition challenging maintainability of case, before Hon’ble S.C.D.R.C., West Bengal. In revision petition No.RP/23/2015, vide order of 14/07/2017, Hon’ble S.C.D.R.C., West Bengal dismissed the revision petition and thereby upheld the order of this commission.

Thereafter, even opportunity of filing w.v. having been given, the O.p. did not file the same and accordingly the case proceeded ex-parte against the O.p. vide order of 12/02/2018.

Again the O.p. filed petition for vacating the ex-parte order and the same, on being heard, was rejected vide order dated 05/02/2019.

Hence, the ex-parte hearing.

Complainant filed evidence on affidavit and B.N.A. in support of his case.

POINT FOR DECISION

Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief as sought for?

DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS

We have applied our mind and carefully perused the case record.

The complainant through his evidence-on-affidavit and B.N.A. has successfully established his case and such evidence though not formally challenged by the O.p. but O.ps. contention in the form of petition challenging maintainability has been rejected by this commission and the order to that effect has been upheld by Hon’ble S.C.D.R.C.

Hon’ble S.C.D.R.C. in its order observed; “However, it is worth noting  here that in respect of the service connections provided to the respondent/complainant at premises no.22, Mahendra Nath Roy Lane, P.O. & District-Howrah there is no such allegation (of theft of electricity). On the other hand, in view of our observation that revisionist has miserably failed to show any provision in the Electricity Act whereof the Revisionist has been given due authority to disconnect the service connection of a consumer provided at a different location on account of non-payment of claim amount in respect of service connection situated at another location……”.

Further, observation of Hon’ble S.C.D.R.C. while upholding order of this commission, clearly and categorically mentioned that the Electricity Act does not offer any authority to the O.p. for disconnecting service connection of a consumer provided act a different location on account of non-payment of claim amount in respect of service connection situated at another place.

Going by the aforesaid observation of Hon’ble S.C.D.R.C., West Bengal, we are of the opinion that the O.p. travelled beyond the jurisdiction and limitation of law in disconnecting the service connection at the premises at 22, Mahendra Nath Roy Lane, P.O. & District-Howrah.

Thus, the complaint survives and the complainant is entitled to get relief. Hence,

           it is,

O R D E R E D

that the C.C. case no.368/2014 be and the same is allowed ex-parte with cost against the O.p. as follows:

That the O.p. is directed not to disconnect the electric meter of the complainant being consumer nos. 5900119025, 3593688, 59001109034 and 4170461, lying and situated at 22, Mahendra Nath Lane, P.S. & District-Howrah in any manner whatsoever.

That the O.p. shall pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation to the complainant within thirty days of this order.  

Let a plain copy of this order be given to the complainant free of cost.

Dictated and corrected by me.

(Subir Kumar Dass)

Member, D.C.D.R.C.,

Howrah.