Orissa

Jajapur

CC/64/2023

Gangadhar Mallik. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Executive Engineer Electrical,TPNODL. - Opp.Party(s)

Paresh Kumar Dhal.

19 Jan 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : JAJPUR : ODISHA.

Consumer Complaint No. 64 / 2023.

Date of filing Complaint   :-                28.03.2023

Date of Order                  :        19.01.2024.                       

Dated the 19th day of   January’ 2023.

Gangadhar Mallik, S/O Iswar Chandra Mallik

Vill. / P.O. Arei

 P.S. Binjharpur , Dist:- Jajpur,                                                    .  .  .  .  Complainant. 

                                    Versus.

1. Executiv e Engineer, Electrical, TPNODL,At.Bahabalpur, P.O. Kodandapur

            Dist. Jajpur.

2. . S.D.O, TPNODL,Binjharpur, At/P.O/ Balamukuli, P.S.Binjharpur

              Dist. Jajpur.

.   3. Junior Engineer,Electrical,TPNODL, At/P.O/ Sayedpur, P.S. Binjharpur

          Dist. Jajpur.                                                                               .  .  .  .  Opp. Parties.

P R E S E N T S.

                        1. smt. Susmita Mishra, President.

                        2.    Sri Bibekananda Das,       Member .

               Counsels appeared for the parties.                           

For the Complainant           Sri P.K.Dhal, Advocate. 

For the Opp. Parties:            Sri G.Ch.Panda, B.R.Rout, Advocates..

J U D G M E N T.

MRS SUSMITA MISHRA, PRESIDENT  

                      The complainant namely Gangadhar Mallick, aged about 52 years  has filed the C.C.Case No. 64 of 23 against the above named O.ps Under section 35 of the C.P.Act, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the O.Ps and seeking following reliefs:-

“ Pass an order declaring the sundry charges as null and void and also pass order to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and any other relief as your honour deem fit and proper may pass in favour of the petitioner ….”.

                   The facts relevant for the present dispute as per complaint petition in brief are that the complainant is a poor daily labourman who is a domestic electrical consumer under the O.Ps bearing consumer No. 612421081143. That the complainant being a domestic  consumer always pay the bill regularly as per the meter reading. At present on dated 23.01.2023, he got the bill for the month of January,2023 wherein it is seen that the aforesaid amounting Rs.5489.31 as Sundry charge and total amount including Arrear Rs.7791.00/-. The complainant is challenging the Sundry charge which is not admissible for him. But it is stated by the complainant that he is ready to pay the arrear dues. Being a poor daily labourman the alleged amount of Rs.5489.31/- as Sundry Charges is a huge amount for him. So the complainant contacted with the O.ps, but they suggested to take shelter of proper Forum. Hence this petition.

                   Upon notice, the O.ps are appeared and filed their written version through their learned counsel.

                   The contention of the O.ps that the present claim is only bill dispute and the same is within the purview of the G.R.F constituted U/sec.45 of the Electricity Act,2003. It is stated by the O.ps that this case is not maintainable in view of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court. It is admitted by the O.ps that the present complainant is a domestic consumer bearing Consumer No.612421081143. It is also stated by the O.ps that there is an old meter in the premises of the complainant and the same found defective since June,2020 till March,2022. Accordingly provisionally LF Bills were charged . It is further stated by the O.ps that in March,2022 one new electrical meter bearing  No.TPNODL 3103 7433 was installed in the premises of the complainant. Since then the electricity bills were prepared on actual meter reading. It is also stated by the O.ps that the average of the meter readings per month were taken continuously on new meter. According to O.ps, such average unit bills were corrected from June,2020 till February,2022 and the differential of electricity bill amount calculated  minus LF Bill. As a result, the differential of electricity bills calculated during  the said period the total amount to be paid by the consumer / complainant amounting to Rs.5489.31 paisa. Denied all other allegations and not admitted by the O.Ps . The demand has rightly been raised from the complainant as he is liable to pay the said charges raised in the electricity bill. So there was no deficiency in service, the O.ps have prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

                   On 08.12.2023, the learned advocate on behalf of the complainant is present , but none appeared on behalf of the O.Ps for hearing. Hence, argument heard from the side of the complainant. Perused pleadings and documents available on record carefully.

                After  perusal of the entire case record, it is our considered view that since this C.C. Case relates to a matter involved U/sec.45, of Electricity Act, 2003, the present C.C. Case is not maintainable before this Commission But however taking a linenet view the O.Ps may deducted up to 40% of the bill amount, as they usually do and after receipt of a application from the complainant , the current bill may be revised by the O.ps.

                   With the aforesaid observation, and direction the C.C.Case No.64/2023 is accordingly disposed of.

Issue extract of the order to the  concerned parties .

Judgment pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 19th day of  January’ 2024.