JUSTICE V.K. JAIN, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL) The complainant / petitioner had obtained an electricity connection from the respondent for domestic purposes. On the basis of an inspection alleged to have been carried out on 21.8.2017, the respondent assessed a demand of Rs.26,481/- on the ground that the electricity was being used for a commercial purpose. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint, challenging the assessment made by the respondent. The following were the reliefs sought in the consumer complaint: That the complaint of complainant be awarded with cost against opposite party with a direction to the opposite party to set aside the assessment of Rs.26,481/- in domestic electricity connection 4817/052827 and it be not levied and as per previous record sanctioned load of 2KW be converted from commercial to domestic and accordingly amended bill be issued and Rs.20,000/- be provided from the opposite party to complainant. That the other reliefs as this Court deems fit and proper be given in favour of complainant against the opposite party.
2. The complaint was resisted by the respondent, which took a preliminary objection that the consumer forum did not have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. 3. The District Forum vide its order dated 08.2.2019, allowed the consumer complaint and set aside the demand. 4. Being aggrieved from the order passed by the District Forum, the respondent approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal. Vide impugned order dated 25.2.2020, the State Commission allowed the appeal and dismissed the consumer complaint on the ground that a consumer complaint was not maintainable in the Consumer Forum. Being aggrieved, the complainant / petitioner is before this Commission by way of this revision petition. 5. It is evident from the pleadings of the parties that the respondent had assessed a demand of Rs.26,481/- against the petitioner. The said assessment was expressly challenged by the petitioner in the consumer complaint. It is also evident from the pleadings that the assessment was based upon the alleged unauthorized use of the electricity by the petitioner/complainant. The case of the respondent is that though the connection was sanctioned for domestic purposes, the same was being used by the petitioner for a commercial purpose. 6. The issue involved in this petition came up for the consideration of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Anis Ahmad in Civil Appeal No.5466/2012 (arising out of SLP No.35906 of 2011) decided on 01.7.2013, and the following view was taken: “47. In view of the observation made above, we hold that: (i) In case of inconsistency between the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the provisions of Consumer Protection Act will prevail, but ipso facto it will not vest the Consumer Forum with the power to redress any dispute with regard to the matters which do not come within the meaning of “service” as defined under Section 2(1)(o) or “complaint” as defined under Section 2(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. (ii) A “complaint” against the assessment made by assessing officer under Section 126 or against the offences committed under Sections 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is not maintainable before a Consumer Forum. (iii) The Electricity Act, 2003 and the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 runs parallel for giving redressal to any person, who falls within the meaning of "consumer" under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 or the Central Government or the State Government or association of consumers but it is limited to the dispute relating to "unfair trade practice" or a "restrictive trade practice adopted by the service provider"; or “if the consumer suffers from deficiency in service”; or “hazardous service”; or “the service provider has charged a price in excess of the price fixed by or under any law”. 7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court thus clearly held that a consumer complaint against the assessment made under Section126 of the Electricity Act is not maintainable. 8. Section 126 of the Electricity Act, to the extent it is relevant reads as under: “Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 empowers the assessing officer to make assessment in case of “unauthorized use of electricity". It provides that if on an inspection of any place or premises or after inspection of the equipments, gadgets, machines, devices found connected or used, or after inspection of records maintained by any person, the assessing officer comes to the conclusion that such person is indulging in "unauthorized use of electricity", he shall assess the electricity charges payable by such person or by any other person benefitted by such use, the Section reads as under: "126. Assessment. 1) If on an inspection of any place or premises or after inspection of the equipments, gadgets, machines, devices found connected or used, or after inspection of records maintained by any person, the assessing officer comes to the conclusion that such person is indulging in unauthorized use of electricity, he shall provisionally assess to the best of his judgement the electricity charges payable by such person or by any other person benefited by such use. 2) The order of provisional assessment shall be served upon the person in occupation or possession or in charge of the place or premises in such manner as may be prescribed. 3) The person, on whom an order has been served under subsection (2) shall be entitled to file objections, if any, against the provisional assessment before the assessing officer, who shall, after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to such person, pass a final order of assessment within thirty days from the date of service of such order of provisional assessment, of the electricity charges payable by such person. 4) Any person served with the order of provisional assessment, may, accept such assessment and deposit the assessed amount with the licensee within seven days of service of such provisional assessment order upon him. 5) If the assessing officer reaches to the conclusion that unauthorized use of electricity has taken place, the assessment shall be made for the entire period during which such unauthorized use of electricity has taken place and if, however, the period during which such unauthorized use of electricity has taken place cannot be ascertained, such period shall be limited to a period of twelve months immediately preceding the date of inspection. 6) The assessment under this section shall be made at a rate equal to (twice) the tariff applicable for the relevant category of services specified in subsection (5). Explanation. For the purposes of this section,(a) “ assessing officer” means an officer of a State Government or Board or licensee, as the case may be, designated as such by the State Government; (b) “unauthorised use of electricity” means the usage of
electricity – (i)by any artificial means; or (ii)by a means not authorised by the concerned person or authority or licensee; or (iii)through a tampered meter; or (iv)for the purpose other than for which the usage of electricity was authorized; or (v)for the premises or areas other than those for which the supply of electricity was authorized.” 9. Since the case of the respondent is that the electricity was being used by the petitioner / complainant for a commercial purpose, though the load was sanctioned for domestic purpose, this would be a case of the unauthorized use of electricity within the meaning of explanation below Section 126 of the Electricity Act. Therefore, the assessment made under the aforesaid provision of the Electricity Act could not have been challenged before a Consumer Forum. The view taken by the State Commission, being strictly in conformity with the above referred decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, does not call for any interference by this Commission in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. The revision petition is therefore dismissed. It is however, made clear that the dismissal of the complaint does not come in the way of the petitioner / complainant availing such remedy other than a consumer complaint, as may be open to him in law. | 
