Orissa

Jajapur

CC/25/2016

Sri Bipin Bihari Sahoo. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Electrical J.E,Binjharpur. - Opp.Party(s)

05 May 2017

ORDER

                IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

 

                                                        Present:      1.Shri Jiban ballav Das , President

                                                                            2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                            3.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.

                                              Dated the 5th day of May,2017.

                                                      C.C.Case No.25 of 2016

Sri Bipin Bihari Sahoo  S/O Sri Krushna ch.Sahoo

Vill. Fatepur, Dist.-Jajpur.                                                                            …… ……....Complainant .                                                                       Con.No.1239TD

                   (Versus)

1.Electrical J.E,Binjharpur, Dist.Jajpur .

2.S.D.O,Electrical,Binjharpur ,Dist. Jajpur .

                                                                                                                          ……………..Opp.Parties.                  

For the Complainant:                           Sri Prahallad Sahoo, Advocate.

For the Opp.Parties :                            Self.

                                                                                                     Date of order:   05.05.2017.

SHRI  JIBAN BALLAV DAS , PRESIDENT .

The petitioner  filed the present dispute alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.

            The fact relevant in the present dispute in brief is that  the petitioner is a consumer under the O.Ps bearing consumer No.BL12397D .The petitioner is paying the electricity dues regularly as per meter reading.

            That in the month of July-15 the petitioner suddenly received an inflated bill from the O.Ps amounting to Rs.1887 for the  month of June-2015. Thereafter the petitioner approached the O.P through written application regarding correction of the wrong inflated bill, But the O.P remained  silent regarding his grievance.  The petitioner  also alleged that  the concerned line man of the area demanded illegal money and due to non payment of the  illegal money the line man  knowingly tampered  the meter .As a result such inflated bill  has been assessed  in the month of June-15.

            Accordingly finding no other way the petitioner has filed present case  with the prayer to direct the O.Ps for correction of the electricity bill of July-15.

            After notices the O.Ps have appeared and filed their written version taking following defence;

That the complainant is a domestic Consumer under the balamukuli Electrical section and his consumer No. BL 12397D with a C.D of 1K.W. The consumer meter bearing SL No.NES03328 was installed during April’2014 and the bill was served to him on monthly basis and the consumer was also paying the electricity bill on monthly basis by availing monthly rebate with actual meter reading . The claim of the petitioner was purely false and fabricated. On one side the petitioner claims that his bill is OK till May’15 ( at that time the meter reading was 1102KWH) then the meter was again OK from July;15 ( at that time the meter reading was 1502KWH i.e 1560 KWH-58WH) on other hand, claiming that the differential 400 units i.e 1502KWH-1102KWH was not erroneous  billing to harass   him .

            At present the C.M.R of the  consumer meter was 236KWH on dt.28.04.2016 and the meter was properly sealed from the date of its installation. So, there is no case  of tampering  to his meter. According to O.P Mr. Subrat Ku. Sahoo, LM-B is one of the most dedicated and honest employee of our Department, His integrity can never be doubted in an eagle eye also. In view of the above, it is proved that the petitioner has either not understood the matter or knowingly avoided  to pay the actual electricity dues by making false and fabricated complain against our Department staff. For the reason stated above necessary order may please be passed   to the petitioner to make payment of his arrear electricity dues.

            In view of the above pleadings of both the parties we perused the record along with documents and ledger copy filed from the side of the O.P we are inclined to dispose of the dispute  as per our observations  below:

            Admittedly the petitioner is a regular consumer under the O.Ps who is availing monthly rebate to pay the monthly electricity dues in time. It is clearly reflected in the ledger copy that there was no arrear shown  against the petitioner up to may’2015 but the bill of June’15  indicates that a huse amount of Rs.1926.80 / has been added in the ledger copy showing consumption of 400 units in that month. The meter installed in the premises of the petitioner in the month of April-2014  and  the bill charged on  the petitioner as per monthly meter reading . The petitioner also paid the electricity bill regularly availing monthly rebate .It is pertinent to mention here that we verified the entire ledger copy from the side of O.P and after verification we did not find any justification regarding 400 units electricity  consumption of the petitioner  in the month of June- 2015 even if in the most of other months the petitioner electricity  consumption does not exceed more than 100 units . Further more it is also not understood under what circumstances the O.ps have filed two numbers of ledger copy in one ledger copy which was filed along with written version  shows that Up to the month of April-15 the meter no. was VES-03328 and from May-15  the meter no. was KNE S0332 .Subsequently the O.P filed another ledger copy which was reflected in the meter no. NES03328 up to April-15. Thereafter May-15 the meter no. shows that KNES03328 .It is also the fact that  the meter installed in the month of April-14 shows continuance  reading up to January-17 .In view of the above factual aspect we hold that the meter was installed in the premises of the complainant is not properly  functioning  from May-15, for which  the dispute  arises  and the O.P erroneously  has  harassed  the domestic consumer who is an old man and paying  the electricity bill regularly.

Hence this Order :

            In the net result the dispute is allowed against the O.P. The O.P is directed to revise the electricity dues from May,2015 on average basis after installing  a new meter in the premises of the petitioner as per Sec-97 of OERC Code within three months after receipt of this order. The petitioner is also directed to pay the arrear electricity  dues if so after receipt of the revised electricity bills.                       

This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 5th day of May,2017. under my hand and seal of the Forum.