West Bengal

Bankura

CC/19/2018

Netaji Industrial Works Situated - Complainant(s)

Versus

Divisional Engineer WESEDCL Regional Office - Opp.Party(s)

Mahinnuddin Ahammed

29 Mar 2023

ORDER

IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION BANKURA

Consumer  Complaint  No. 19/2018

Date of Filing : 07.03.2018

Before:

1. Samiran Dutta                              Ld. President.      

2. Rina Mukherjee                          Ld. Member. 

3. Siddhartha Sankar Bhui            Ld. Member.

 

For the Complainant: Ld. Advocate Mahiuddin Ahmed

For the O.P. Ld. Advocate Jayanta Chowdhury

 

Complainant                                                                                                          

Sri Shyam Sundar Kedia, S/o Late Benarasilal Kedia, at Beliatore,   Bankura

Opposite Party  

1.Divisional Manager, WBSEDCL, Labazar, Bankura 

2.Station Manager, Beliatore Gr. Electricity Supply, Bankura

 

FINAL ORDER / JUDGEMENT                        

                                                                                                                                   

Order No.33                                                                                   

Dt. 29-03-2023

Both parties filed hazira through advocate.

The case is fixed for argument.

After hearing argument from both sides the Commission proceeds to dispose of the case as hereunder: -

The complainant’s case is that he is an industrial Consumer under the O.P. for operating his Rolling Mill and the electric connection was effectuated on 13-12-1961 and at the time of installation of electricity Rs.1,16,200/- was paid to the O.P. as Security deposit and thereafter the O.P. sent incorrect electric bills which the complainant naturally did not pay as a result of which the said electric connection was disconnected by the O.P. on 11-03-2003 with a wrong claim of Rs.4,63,696/- as outstanding dues. Through the intervention of Departmental Head of O.P. and on the prayer of the complainant said outstanding dues was adjusted with the Security  Deposit amount and further payment of Rs.25,012/-  made by the complainant.

                                                                                                                                                                                Contd…….p/2

Page: 2

Thereafter the complainant requested the O.P. several times to restore the electric connection into his Rolling Mill premises but nothing was done and finding it difficult to get the electric connection the complainant on the demand of the O.P. deposited Rs.6,32,259/- on 25-02-2008 on protest as the service connection charges for new connection to his Rolling Mill and the new connection was installed on 12-08-2008. Thereafter the complainant sent a series of letters to the O.P. authority for adjustment of the said service connection charge of Rs.6,32,259/- with the current electric bills but the O.P. never yielded to his prayer and ultimately by letter dated: 09-12-2016 the O.P. finally intimated the complainant that the complainant does not deserve any  refund of service connection charge as the connection effected to his Rolling Mill is a new connection with new installation  but not reconnection with old installation.

The complainant has therefore approached this Commission for appropriate relief.

The O.P. contested the case by filing a written version contending inter alia that the complainant is not entitled to get adjustment of the deposit of service connection charge of Rs.6,32,259/- as it is not a reconnection of the old installation but a new connection  with new installation.

-:Decision with reasons:-

Having regard to the facts of the case, materials on record and the contention and submission on both sides the Commission finds that after disconnection of the old installation the complainant has applied for new connection on deposit of Rs.6,32,259/- as service connection charge. The complainant had the impression that he could get the adjustment of such service connection charge as if he is enjoying the old connection. Such impression of the complainant is misconceived as an electric connection which stands disconnected w.e.f.11-03-2003 cannot remain alive and operational till 12-08-2008 when new connection was installed.

                                                                                                                                                                                       Contd…..p/3

Page: 3

In view of Notification No.36/WBERC, dated: 12-09-2007 where Regulation 4.6.1 categorically provides that if the power supply to any consumer remains disconnected continuously for a period of 180 days where the disconnection has been effected in compliance with any of the Provisions of the Act or Regulations the agreement of the licensee with the consumer for supply of electricity shall be deemed to have been terminated with consequential effect on expiry of the said period of 180 days.

It is therefore clear from the above regulation that irrespective of official termination of the old agreement followed by execution of new agreement the complainant/consumer after a long lapse of 5 years of disconnection cannot claim the new connection to be the continuation of the old connection with all the consequential benefits therefrom.

Under Electricity Act, 2003 there is no provision for refund / adjustment of service connection charge as it is an one time payment made at the time of new installation of electric conncetion. 

The O.P. has rightly turned down the prayer of the complainant for adjustment/refund of the service connection charge of Rs.6,32,259/- with the current bills.

The case has therefore no merit to succeed.

Hence it is ordered……

That the case be and the same is dismissed on contest but without cost.

Both parties be supplied copy of this order free of cost.

 

   __________________              ________________              ________________

HON’BLE   PRESIDENT       HON’BLE    MEMBER      HON’BLE    MEMBER