IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,DEOGARH.
C.C.NO. 10/2016.
Present: Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Sri Pratap Chandra Mahapatra, Member and Smt. Jayanti Pradhan, Member (W).
Pravat Kumar Pradhan, aged about 55 Yrs,
S/O-Late Arjun Mohan Pradhan,
R/O.-At/-Municipoality Sahi,
Post/P.S/Dist/-Deogarh. …. Complainant
Versus
- The Electrical Section Officer
Deogarh ,WESCO Utility,
At/P.O/P.S/- Dist-Deogarh.
- The S.D.O,Deogarh Electrical,WESCO,
At-P.O/P.S/Dist-Deogarh.
3. WESCO,Represented through Executive Engineer,
Deogarh Electrical Division,
At-P.O/P.s/Dist-Deogarh. .… Opposite Party
For the Complainant : Sri D.K.Guru,Advocate.
For the Opp.Parties : Sri R.K.Pradhan, Advocate.
Date of Hearing: 05.07.2017, Date of Order: 07.07.2017
SRI DIPAK KUMAR MAHAPATRA, PRESIDENT:-The facts of the case in the nutshell are as under:-
The Complainant stated that, he is the son of the original consumer of electricity and after the death of his father, the complainant, being the legal heir and successor his father filed a complaint against the O.Ps.The complainant has availed electric connection in his domestic house vide no-41414010038, during the lifetime of his father and paying bill regularly. In the month of December-2010, the new meter was replaced against an old meter on payment by the complainant, though the old meter was functioning properly and the same was became out of order after six months of installation. Then the monthly consumption of the electric was fixed to an average of 83 units per month and bill served to the complainant and payment was being made by him (complainant) accordingly. But from Dec-2013 to November-2014
it raised to 117 units, from Dec-2014, the bill raised to 200 units, from January 2015 to till date the billing is 360 units per month which is unexpected as stated by the complainant with the same consumption standard. Again the Complainant has started that, he has neither constructed any new house nor consumption of electricity has been raised. The complainant is making the payment regularly to the O.Ps and has several times met the O.Ps to solve the problem but in vain. In addition to that, it is alleged by the Complainant that the O.Ps threatened him time to time to disconnect the electric connection in failure to pay the arrears without serving any disconnection notice but on his request they did not disconnect the same. Again the Complainant has stated that the licensee, WESCO has not authorized to collect the arrears which was lying outstanding against the complainant during the management of Orissa State Electricity Board (OSEB). So the O.Ps may be penalized.
On the other hand the advocate for the O.Ps stated that there was actual billing as per the meter reading for consumption up to July-2011 is lying outstanding, amounting to Rs.19,044.59 with the Complainant. Thereafter, due to defective meter the bill was fixed provisionally to 83 & 117 units per month and the Complainant has taken benefit of provisional billing as the actual meter reading was much more than the provisional one. Due to enhancement of the provisional billing of unit as per the guidelines of OERC Tariff Order in case of defective meter, the enhancement of monthly unit was fixed. Further after installation of new meter the average consumption was recorded and fixed to 126 units/month up to Nov-2014 and no revision since then is made. Again the Complainant has not any time complained against the defective meter to replace it and there is no dispute regarding the authority of billing by WESCO after OSEB, as the entire franchisee has been taken over by the former after observation of guidelines and other terms and conditions as provided by the Authority. Lastly the Advocate for the O.Ps stated that the Complain petition is frivolous, vexatious, hence deserves to be dismissed.
Heard. From the above it can be inferred that, being a consumer the complainant is enjoying the supply of electricity since long. As the meter was found defective, the monthly consumption of electric was fixed provisionally at 83 units/month initially. As the O.Ps did not take any steps towards replacement of the defective meter the complainant has availed the facility of provisional billing for long time and there is no evidence that he any time reminded the O.Ps to replace the defective meter to avail an Actual Bill and make payment accordingly. But when the
provisional billing units have changed according to the amended terms and conditions of OERC Tariff Order applied to defective meter, the complainant suddenly wake up and protested against the same. The old electric bill submitted by the Complaint for the month of October-2012 shows consumption of an average of 83 units with an outstanding amount of Rs. 19,211.00 against the complainant. It reveals the complainant was not paying the monthly electric bill regularly. Though the O.Ps demanded payment of arrears, but till today they did not disconnected the power supply and the complainant is still enjoying the facility of electric connection uninterruptedly. The Complainant also challenged the authority of WESCO to collect outstanding dues from the period of OSEB which is not maintainable as because “to un-bundle and corporatize OSEB, to develop an autonomous power sector regulatory body, to privatize the generation and distribution businesses, the Orissa Power Sector Reform Project was designed. The reforms process started with the nactment of The Orissa Electricity Reform Act in 1995. The Act allowed for transfer of the assets, liabilities, staff, and statutory obligations of the OSEB to successor companies. As per the pictorial representation of the change in the structure of the industry given below”-
So the WESCO is rightly authorized to collect all the outstanding dues from the existing consumers of electricity U/S-43 of Electricity Act-2003 U/S-43 of Electricity Act-2003 on behalf of O.S.E.B.
Again, there is no evidence filed by the O.Ps to show that the meter was defective and they have fixed the average consumption at 126 unit/month. If the meter is defective, there is a provision in the Electrical Act that,(a) The Licensee shall have the right to test any meter and related apparatus if there is a reasonable doubt about the accuracy of the meter and the consumer shall provide the Licensee necessary assistance in conduct of test. (b) A consumer may request the Licensee to test the meter installed on his premises if he doubts its accuracy of meter readings not commensurate with his consumption of electricity, stoppage of meter, damage to seal, by applying to the Licensee in prescribed format along with the requisite testing fee. The Licensee shall test the meter within 15 days of the receipt of the application, at consumer’s premises, or within 30 days at licensee’s lab, or Independent lab, or By installing a tested check meter in series with the existing meter within 7 days of filing of application. In case of testing of meter at consumer’s premises, the testing of meter shall be done for a minimum consumption of 1 kWh. The meter testing team of the licensee shall carry heating load of sufficient capacity to carry out the testing. Optical Scanner may be used for counting the pulses / revolutions or meter shall be tested as per the procedure described in IS / IER 1956 or through aqua-check for LT meters and through RSS for others.
(ii) In case the meter is found fast / slow by the licensee, and the consumer agrees to the report, the meter shall be replaced by a new meter within 15 days, and bills of previous three months prior to the month in which the dispute has arisen shall be adjusted in the subsequent bill as per the test results
(iii) If the consumer disputes the results of testing, or testing at consumer’s premises is difficult, the defective meter shall be replaced by a new tested meter by the Licensee, and, the defective meter after sealing in presence of consumer, shall be tested at licensee’s lab / Independent lab / Electrical Inspector, as agreed by consumer. The option once exercised by consumer shall not be changed. The decision on the basis of reports of the test lab shall be final on the Licensee as well as the consumer. ] (e) In case a check meter is installed, and if after 7-15 days of the period of test, the existing meter is found to be fast or slow beyond the permissible limits, and the test results are not disputed by the consumer, then the same would be removed leaving the check meter in its place for future metering, and bills of previous three months prior to the month in which the dispute has arisen shall be adjusted in the next bill as per the test results.
Here the O.Ps did not follow the procedures to avail actual consumption per month in the house of the Complainant and haphazardly fixed the unit/month which is inevitable. So the Complainant should not be penalized for faulty meter.
From all the above discussion, after going through the materials on record, the interference comes out that, the Complainant is a bonafide consumer of Electricity and has been unnecessarily harassed by the O.Ps by supplying wrong and defective electric bill showing a huge amount of arrear which shows the negligence on the part of the O.Ps. The O.Ps have committed deficiency in service U/S-2(1)(g) to the complainant as he has sustained both mental pain and agony by the O.Ps and could have provided a fresh and correct bill to the complainant. That, the O.Ps did not bother to serve him, rather harassed him. So it is the duty of the O.Ps to provide a bill free of error and omission against the defective and wrong bill.
ORDER
The O.Ps are directed to replace the defective meter inplace of a new defective meter, recalculate the actual consumption per month since the day of the meter found defective, adjust the arrears amount with current electric bill and provide correct electric bill every month basing on the actual meter reading to the Complainant. The O.Ps are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards compensation & Rs.2,000/- towards cost of litigation to the complainant within 30 days of receipt of this order.
Office is directed to supply the free copies of the order to the parties free of costs receiving acknowledgement of the delivery thereof.
Order is pronounced in the open court today i.e. on 7th day of July, 2017 under my hand and seal of this forum.
I agree, I agree,
MEMBER,(W). MEMBER. PRESIDENT.
Dictated and Corrected
by me.
PRESIDENT.
