MRS RAJASHREE AGARWALLA, MEMBER-

             Deficiency in service in respect of providing inflated energy bills are the allegations arrayed against ops.

2.                 Complaint in nutshell reveals that complainant is a domestic category of consumer under Ops, bearing consumer No.011037072 and a physical verification was conducted by Op no.3 on the premises of the complainant and after verification contact demand was enhanced from 1.5 kw to 2.5 kw and Ops imposed a fine amount of Rs. 12,225/- without giving any assessment Notice. It is alleged that the previous outstanding amount was Rs. 7,265.95 /- but Ops illegally served a bill in the month of Nov-2015 showing an amount of Rs. 24,864/-. It is also stated that if the penal amount is included on the previous arrear dues the total dues of the complainant will be Rs. 19,491/-, but the Ops without considering charged an excess amount of Rs. 5,374/- which is not only without any basis but also illegal and arbitrary. The cause of action of the instant case arose on 13/08/2015 when the Ops did not correct the inflated bill, hence the complainant before the Forum with prayer the energy bills and top pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment.

3.                   Being Noticed Ops appeared through their ld. Counsel and joint written statement challenging the maintainability of the complainant stating that this Forum lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint U/S 145,174,175 of I.E.Act-2003 also citing the decision of Honbl’e Apex Court in the case of  U.P. power Corporation and other vrs Anish Ahmed reported in O.L.R.2014(I) sc-68.  In the written statement it is averred that complainant Bhiklari Charan Sahoo is a domestic category of consumer bearing consumer No.- 01103072. Complainants premises was physically verified the CESU authorities in 13/08/2015 and authorities found that complainant is availing the power supply by tampering the meter, body seal and TP seal and the meter seal does not match with billing documents.

                Accordingly, as per the provisions U/S 126 of I.E.Act-2003 the assessing officer imposed a penalty amounting of Rs. 12254.69/-. The copy of the PVR and provisional assessment are filed in to the dispute as Annexure-A & B. It is further averred in the written statement that as the complainant has not challenged the provisional assessment within stipulated period of 7 days, the provisional assessment is treated as final assessing amount and in the circumstances the complaint is devoid of any merit and is liable to be dismissed.

4.                    Heard the ld. Counsel for the Ops and case of the complainant on merit and perused the Annexures, it is an admitted fact that complainant is a domestic category of consumer under Ops and a physical verification was conducted in the premises of the complainant and a penalty of Rs. 12,000/-and odd was imposed as penalty on assessment for unauthorized use of electricity. It appears from the Annexure-A, the physical verification report (PVR)   that the complainant was imposed after assessment, which is partly admitted by the Complainant. Hence it is a case of the unauthorized use of electricity. In the situation, we have to decide the position of law involved in the dispute regarding maintainability of the complainant as raised by Ops. It is the plea of the Ops that U/S 126 of I.E. Act-2003 where an Assessment has been made for the theft of energy or unauthorized use of electricity, this Forum lacks the jurisdiction U/S 145 of I.E. Act-2003, to substantiate their case Ops relied on the decision of Honbl’e Apex Court in case of the Up power Corporation Ltd. & others vrs Anish Ahmed. Further Honbl’e national Commission in allegation of ‘theft of energy’ ‘unauthorized use of electricity’ even in case of ‘suspect of theft of energy’, observed that consumer Forum lacks the jurisdiction to adjudicate the complaint, the remedy lies with the appropriate authority appointed by Government. We cite decisions of Honbl’e National Commission in case of Jodhapur Vidyut Nigam Ltd vrs Mohit Computers & Electronics, reported in 2014(4) CPR(NC) and in case of UHBVNL vrs Sarhichander reported in 2014(4) CPR(NC).

                               Having observations reflected above the complaint is disposed of and if complainant desires to put forth his grievance same to be raised before appropriate authority, within one month of receipt of this order, limitation of filing Complaint if any is not a legal bar for filing the complaint before the authority.

             Accordingly, the Complaint is disposed of without cost.

        Pronounced in the open Court, this 23rd Day of February, 2017.