Orissa

Kendrapara

CC/4/2014

Natabar Dhal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Executive Engineer, CESU - Opp.Party(s)

Himself

01 Sep 2015

ORDER

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
KENDRAPARA, ODISHA
 
Complaint Case No. CC/4/2014
 
1. Natabar Dhal
S/o-Late Gajindranath Dhal AT- Jagannathpur Po- Amrutamanohi,
Kendrapara
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Executive Engineer, CESU
Kendrapara Divn.No.1 At/Po-Kendrapara
Kendrapara
Odisha
2. SDO,(Elec.) CESU
At/Po-Pattamundei
Kendrapara
Odisha
3. Junior Engineer,CESU
At/Po- Dandishai
Kendrapara
Odisha
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Sri B.K. Das PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. sri Nayananda Das MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:Himself, Advocate
For the Opp. Party: S.Pradhan, Advocate
Dated : 01 Sep 2015
Final Order / Judgement

SRI BIJAYA KUMAR DAS,PRESIDENT:-

                          Deficiency in service  in respect of providing inflated monthly energy bills are the allegations arrayed against the Opp.Parties.   

                  Complaint, in brief reveals that complainant  is a consumer under the Opp.Parties Orissa State Electricity Board now  at present functioning as CESU. Complainant is availing power supply since the year 1976 having consumer No.013882645. In the year 1982 during heavy cyclone the domestic house of the complainant was delapated and complainant shifted to a new house in the year 2004 oaf  same village and availed power supply with the existing consumer number. Complainant was paying his monthly bill regularly as per the meter reading. Further complaint reveals that he has paid Rs.5,000/- on dt.31.03.13 and has already paid aRs.13,342/- till December,2013. It is alleged that in spite of grievance before the authorities and functioning of meter in OK condition the Ops are providing average bills which needs to revised as per the law.

                   After  notice Ops appeared into the dispute and filed written statement partially denying the allegations and submitting the facts, it is stated that complainant is a consumer under the Ops since the year 1982 bearing Consumer No.01382645(DOM). Due to non-installation of meter average bills were prepared till December,2004. Since,January,2005 to April,2008 energy bills were prepared on meter reading basis. It is averred that during April,2008 bypassing was detected and bills are prepared on load factor basis. On dt.01.08.14 when Franchise Officers of Ops(M/s.Enzen Global Solutions) verified the premises of the complainant found that meter is running OK, but there was no T.P.Box, so the complainant was advised to install a TP Box after installation of TP box the bill will be served on meter reading basis. As the complainant is availing power supply continuously he has to pay electricity charges to avoid the disconnection,  as the complaint devoid of any merit is liable to be dismissed with cost.

                 Heard the authorized agent of the complainant who is the eldest son of the complainant and case of the Ops on merit. It is an admitted fact that complainant is a domestic category of consumer under Ops bearing Consumer No.01382645 and is availing power supply till date. The crux of the dispute relates to preparation of monthly energy bills. Complainant’s case is that though meter was installed and runs in OK condition, the Ops provided bills on average basis. The matter was also reported to the higher authorities. In support of the version complainant filed a copy of letter addressed to OP No.1 on dt.10.04.13 alongwith copy of Courier receipts. On the other hand Ops due to non-installation of meter bill are prepared on average basis till Dec.2004. From Jan.2005 to April,2008 bills are prepared on meter reading basis. On or after April,2008 bills were prepared on load factor basis on allegation of bypassing till dt.01.08.14. On dt.01.08.14 it was found by the Verifying Officer of Ops(Franchise holder) that meter is running OK, but no TP Box was there. The Ops filed attested Xerox copies of physical verification report dt.01.08.14 and dt.08.04.2008, provisional assessment report dt.10.04.14 and monthly/yearly energy bills ( 4 nos.).

              In the circumstances, it is clear that complainant has installed a meter which runs in OK condition, but without any T.P.Box. It will be lawful if the energy bills are prepared as per the norms of the Ops and after taking 3 consequitive  monthly meter reading and to revise the monthly energy bills which are prepared on average/load factor basis after installation of the T.P.Box and on completion of official formalities.

                                            

                                                                          O R D E R

                 Having observations reflected above, it is directed that the order is to be implemented by the Ops within 4 months of receipt of this order. It is also directed that complainant will co-operate the Ops for implementation of the order, any defaulting party lacks to implement the order will pay Rs.50/- per day from the date of the order.

                 Complaint is allowed in part on merit.

                      No order as to cost.

          Pronounced in the open Court, this the 1st day of September, 2015.

 

                                                                                                               

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sri B.K. Das]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. sri Nayananda Das]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.