DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: BHADRAK
Dated the 22nd day of December, 2018
Present 1. Shri Raghunath Kar, President
2. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Member
3. Afsara Begum, Member
C.D Case No. 65 of 2015
Daitari Tripathy
S/o Nityananda Tripathy,
Vill: Shyampur,
Po/Ps: Dhamnagar,
Dist: Bhadrak
……………………. Complainant
(Versus)
2. Executive Engineer, South Division, Electrical,
NESCO UTILITY, Bhadrak,
At: Aradi Chhak,
Po/Ps/Dist: Bhadrak
3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Electrical,
NESCO UTILITY, Dhamnagar,
At/Po/Ps: Dhamnagar,
Dist: Bhadrak
…………………………..Opp. Parties
Counsel For Complainant: Sri G. Dash, Adv
Counsel For the O.Ps: Sri M. Dey
Date of hearing: 24.01.2018
Date of order: 22.12.2018
AFSARA BEGUM, MEMBER
This dispute arises out of complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service against the O.Ps.
The brief facts as set out in the complaint that the complainant is a regular paying consumer under O.Ps since 1998 bearing consumer No. EST No. 484. The complainant is paying electric bills regularly. But on 22.09.2007 his residential house was completely destroyed due to heavy rain fall. Since complainant is residing in rented house. The O.Ps also have not issued electric bill during that period i.e. from 22.09.2007 to 10.06.2010. But on 15.05.2015 the O.Ps illegally demanded Rs 108544.56/- submitting disconnection notice on complainant.
The complainant is a poor person he could not arranged such illegal amount. The complainant requested the O.Ps several times to correct such illegal bills but the O.Ps did not pay respect the complainant, on the other hand they misbehave him. Hence the complainant filed the complaint against the O.Ps sought for the reliefs.
1. The O.Ps be directed to correct illegal bills, on the basis of actual consumption.
2. The O.Ps be directed to pay Rs 5,000/-to the complainant towards mental agony and cost of the litigation.
The complainant submitted the following documents to prove his dispute:-
1. Disconnection notice dt. 15.05.2016, 29.09.2004 & 29.11.2004.
2. Copy of billing data.
3. Electric bills.
4. Money receipts.
The O.Ps appeared and submitted written version, denying all the averments made in the complaint.
The defense set up by the O.Ps as the follows:-
1. That complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable.
2. That the complaint petition is barred by limitation.
3. That the O.Ps have submitted in there written version that, the allegations made by the complainant is out and out false and fabricated, also submitted that the complainant is availing power supply through a correct meter and bill has been made up to October, 2006 on the basis of actual meter, got defective from the month of February, 2007 due to defective meter billing has been made from February, 2007 to September, 2013 on average basis. On October, 2013 a new meter was installed vide meter No. 2488776, which is continuing till today. But the complainant did not raise any voice before the O.Ps.
The O.Ps also submitted in his written version that according to regulation 91 of OERC distribution condition of supply code in the event of any dispute about the billed amount the consumer may lodge a complaint before designated authority. But in this dispute the complainant has not submitted his grievance before designated authority.
Further submitted that as per regulation 97 of the code 2004, billing has been made for the period of defective meter i.e. from October, 2006 to September, 2009 on the basis of average billing. It has already been decided in revision camp in presence of the complainant, in spite of payment of revision amount the complainant has submitted this dispute before this Forum. The O.Ps also cited a decision of National Commission Sri Biswanath Mukharjee Vrs. W.B State in RP No. 2991 of 2006.
The O.Ps also submitted in last Para of their written version that the consumer is availing power supply without paying electricity bill to the O.Ps.
The O.Ps have submitted documents to prove their case i.e. 1 sheet of original revision statement of electricity bill.
The aforesaid dispute has been heard by both the council of the complainant and O.Ps. After perusal of the records and going through the documents submitted by both the parties there are two question arises:-
1. Whether the deficiency in service is committed by the O.Ps or not?
2. Whether the complainant has submitted this dispute before proper Forum or not?
As per the first question we found that the O.Ps have admitted in there written version Para- 5 that on February, 2007 the meter made defective for which the electric bill was made on the average basis from 2007 to 2013. The O.Ps also have knowledge that the consumer is a BPL card holder, in spite of revise of the electric bills the O.Ps served a disconnection notice to the complainant on 15.05.2015, giving threat to disconnect the electric supply which is a very coercive action, taken by the O.Ps.
The O.Ps also submitted in there written version that they have revised the electric bills. But the revision copy submitted by the O.Ps reflects that they may revise electric bills from 2006 to 2013, 62 units per month which is not acceptable by this Forum, because the electric bills submitted by the complainant reflects that the complainant is a BPL card holder and he is consuming 50 units per month. So the O.Ps have committed deficiency of service by supplying illegal bills.
Secondly the O.Ps have submitted in there written version that the complainant has not submitted his grievance in proper Forum, is wrong because the O.Ps have submitted regulation 91 of the OERC distribution condition of supplying code, in the event of any dispute in the billed amount the consumer may a lodge a complaint before the designated authority as determined by the licensee. In this regulation 91 “May” word is used, so the consumer is a poor lay man he is not bound to submit his grievance before G.R.F, Balasore. The aforesaid Forum is set up for giving proper justice to the consumers. So this Forum is proper Forum to submit his grievance.
Based on the evaluation of facts and evidence as has come to our notice, we justifiable come to the conclusion that the complaint is poor BPL card holder he is also paying electric bill regularly. So he is liable to get justice. Hence it is ordered;
- ORDER
The complaint be and the same is allowed against O.Ps on contest without cost. OP No. 1 is directed to revise the bills from October, 2006 to September, 2013 on the basis of average billing at about 50 unit per month. This order must be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 22nd December, 2018 under my hand and seal of the Forum.
