The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps, where O.P No.1 is the Junior Engineer-Cum-Junior Manager, Electric Section, Basta, O.P No.2 is the S.D.O, Electrical, Basta, O.P No.3 is the Executive Engineer, Basta, O.P No.4 is the Superintendent Engineer-Cum-Electrical Engineer, Balia and O.P No.5 is the NESCO Represented through its Executive Director (E.D), Ganeswarpur, Balasore. 

                    2. The case of the Complainant in brief is that the father of the Complainant was a bonafide Consumer under the O.Ps bearing Consumer No.IAD-1186 corresponding new A/c No.322104160018 and was paying electric bills to the O.Ps till his death. After the death of his father, the Complainant was/ is posessing the premises of his father and consuming electricity and also paying all electricity dues to the O.Ps regularly. On 26.11.2015, the staff of the O.P No.1 came to the premises of the Complainant and enquired the meter and said that the said meter is defective one and also assured the Complainant that they will install new meter in the premises of the Complainant, but the O.P No.1 has not installed new meter in the premises of the Complainant. So, the Complainant has filed an application before O.P No.2 regarding his grievances, but the O.P No.2 has not taken any steps. In the month of January-2016, the O.Ps have supplied average electric bill amounting Rs.560/- (Rupees Five hundred sixty) only to the Complainant without verifying the meter status and without installing the meter in the premises of the Complainant. The O.Ps have calculated the electricity dues of the Complainant on average basis i.e. 144 unit per month. Prior to the above said bill, the monthly electricity dues of the Complainant was within Rs.100/- (Rupees One hundred) only to Rs.150/- (Rupees One hundred fifty) only. Thereafter, all of a sudden in March-2016, the O.Ps have supplied illegal and arbitrary bill to the Complainant and demanded Rs.9,940/- (Rupees Nine thousand nine hundred forty) only without any reason. The O.Ps have also supplied arbitrary, illegal and fabricated electric bills to the Complainant for Rs.11,171/- (Rupees Eleven thousand one hundred seventy one) only for 288 units for the month of April-2016, Rs.15,982/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand nine hundred eighty two) only for the month of August-2016 and Rs.20,349/- (Rupees Twenty thousand three hundred forty nine) only for the month of December-2016. The Complainant on 03.01.2017 approached the O.Ps for correction of the above said illegal bills and for installation of new meter in his premises, but the O.Ps did not pay any heed to it, which amounts to deficiency of service by the O.Ps, causing mental agony to the Complainant. Cause of action to file this case arose on 03.01.2017. The Complainant has prayed to install a new meter in his premises and to revise the electric bills and also to waive out the illegal bills of Rs.20,377/- (Rupees Twenty thousand three hundred seventy seven) only along with compensation for mental agony and litigation cost. Neither the Complainant nor his Advocate was present at the time of hearing of this case.

                    3. Written version filed by the O.Ps No.1 to 3 through their Advocate denying on the point of maintainability, Consumer as well as its cause of action. The O.Ps No.1 to 3 have further submitted that the father of the Complainant was a Consumer bearing Consumer No.IAD-1186 (Dom) having contract demand of 1 K.W under the O.Ps. He was a regular defaulter Consumer and the meter installed in his premises was O.K up to November-2015. The meter became defective in the month of December-2015 and billing has been done on load factor basis as per tariff regulation. As the meter was not available in the departmental store of the O.Ps, so the Consumer was informed to install a new meter at his own cost, but neither the Consumer nor his representative turned up, for which billing has been continued on load factor basis as per tariff regulation. On 27.01.2016, the staff of the O.Ps made a spot visit to the premises of the Consumer and after informing the Consumer/ occupier, the spot verification was conducted in presence of one Debajani Behera (Daughter-in-law of the Consumer), where it was detected that the Consumer was availing power supply unauthorisedly by means of tampering the meter, cutting all the seals (T.P Box & body) and interfering with the internal circuit of the meter. Accordingly, a spot verification report was prepared in presence of said Debajani Behera, but she refused to sign on it and also received the same, but refused to acknowledge the same. Thereafter, the provisional assessment U/s.126 of I.E Act, 2003 has been prepared for Rs.13,464/- (Rupees Thirteen thousand four hundred sixty four) only vide order No.1890, dtd.28.01.2016 and the copy of the said order was served to the Consumer by special messenger, but neither the Consumer nor his representative received the same nor filed any objection against the same order. Thus, the final assessment order was prepared for Rs.8,611/- (Rupees Eight thousand six hundred eleven) only vide order No.1999, dtd.29.02.2016 and the copy of the same order was also served to the Consumer through special messenger, but neither the Consumer nor his representative received the same. The Complainant had never intimated at any point of time regarding death of his father and never applied before the O.Ps to change the ownership into his name. After receipt of the notice from this District Forum, the O.Ps came to know regarding death of the father of the Complainant. Thus, the Complainant is not a Consumer as he has no locu-standi to file this case against the O.Ps. On the other hand, the Complainant has filed this case against the order U/s.126 of the I.E Act, hiding the material facts. The Complainant has not appealed before the appellate authority, rather filed this case in this Forum. Thus, the case of the Complainant is liable to be dismissed with cost.

                    4. Though sufficient opportunities were given to O.Ps No.4 and 5 for appearance, but they have not appeared in this case. The O.Ps No.4 and 5 are set ex-parte.

                    5. In view of the above averments of both the Parties, the points for determination of this case are as follows:-

(i) Whether this Consumer case is maintainable as per Law ?

(ii) Whether there is any cause of action to file this case ?

(iii) Whether the Complainant is a Consumer under the O.Ps as per C.P Act-1986 ?

(iv) To what relief the Complainant is entitled for ?

                    6. In order to substantiate their claim, both the Parties have filed certain documents as per list. Perused the documents filed. Neither the Complainant nor his Advocate was present at the time of hearing of this case. So, his pleading remains as it is. In his pleading, he has taken the plea that his father was a Consumer under the O.Ps and after the death of his father, he is residing in the premises of his father and also consuming electricity and was paying the electricity dues to the O.Ps regularly. But, on 26.11.2015, the O.Ps came to his premises and found that the meter was defective one and also assured the Complainant that they will install a new meter in his premises. Thus, the Complainant has filed an application before O.P No.2 for installation of a new meter, but the O.P No.2 has not taken any steps. In the month of January-2016, the O.Ps have supplied average electric bill amounting to Rs.560/- (Rupees Five hundred sixty) only to the Complainant without verifying the meter status and without installing the meter in his premises. Thereafter, the O.Ps have calculated the electricity dues of the Complainant on average basis i.e. 144 unit per month and when the O.Ps have supplied arbitrary, illegal and fabricated electric bills to the Complainant, he has approached on 03.01.2017 to the O.Ps for correction of the illegal bills and for installation of new meter in his premises, but the O.Ps did not pay any heed to it, for which the Complainant came to this Forum and filed this case. He has prayed to install a new meter in his premises and to revise the electric bills and also to waive out the illegal bills of Rs.20,377/- (Rupees Twenty thousand three hundred seventy seven) only along with compensation and litigation cost. On the other hand, the O.Ps No.4 and 5 are set ex-parte as mentioned earlier and it has been argued on behalf of the O.Ps No.1 to 3 that the father of the Complainant was a Consumer and he was a regular defaulter Consumer and also the meter installed in his premises was O.K up to November-2015, but said meter became defective in the month of December-2015 and billing has been done on load factor basis as per tariff regulation. As the meter was not available in the departmental store of the O.Ps, so the Consumer was informed to install a new meter at his own cost, but neither the Consumer nor his representative turned up, for which billing has been continued on load factor basis as per tariff regulation. Thereafter, on 27.01.2016, the O.Ps have verified the premises of the Consumer, where they have found that the Consumer was availing power supply unauthorisedly, for which a spot verification report was prepared and the representative of the Consumer refused to sign on it and also received the same, but refused to acknowledge the same. Thereafter, observing necessary formalities of Law, provisional assessment order was prepared for Rs.13,464/- (Rupees Thirteen thousand four hundred sixty four) only and served to the Consumer by special messenger, but neither the Consumer nor his representative received the same nor filed any objection against the same order. Thus, the final assessment order was prepared for Rs.8,611/- (Rupees Eight thousand six hundred eleven) only and the copy of the same order was also served to the Consumer through special messenger, but neither the Consumer nor his representative received the same. But, the Complainant has neither complied the assessment order made by the O.Ps nor appealed before the appellate authority, rather filed this case in this Forum. Though the father of the Complainant was died, but the date of death is not mentioned by either of the Parties. Since the father of the Complainant was a Consumer under the O.Ps and the Complainant had never applied before the O.Ps to change the ownership into his name, he is not a Consumer under the O.Ps. But, as per Section-2(b) (v) of C.P Act, 1986, in case of death of a Consumer, his legal heir or representative; who or which makes a complaint, is a Complainant. So, according to this definition, the Complainant can file this case in this Forum. But, when there is an assessment, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the case and the Complainant is at liberty to approach the appropriate authority. However, in view of the authority reported in III (2013) CLT-55 (SC) in the case of Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited & Ors. (Vrs.) Anis Ahmad, wherein it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that complaint against assessment made U/s.126 or action taken against those committing offences U/s.135 to 140 of Electricity Act, 2003, held, is not maintainable before a Consumer Forum. Civil Court’s jurisdiction to consider a suit with respect to the decision of assessing Officer U/s.126 or with respect to a decision of the appellate authority U/s.127 is barred U/s.145 of Electricity Act, 2003. Therefore, it is clear that after notice of provisional assessment to the person alleged to have indulged in unauthorized use of electricity, the final decision by an assessing officer, who is a public servant, on the assessment of ‘unauthorized use of electricity’ is a quasi-judicial decision and does not fall within the meaning of “consumer dispute” U/s. 2(1) (e) of Consumer Protection Act. Offences referred to in Sections-135 to 140 can be tried only by a Special Court constituted U/s.153 of Electricity Act, 2003, hence, also the complaint against any action taken under Sections-135 to 140 of Electricity Act, 2003 is not maintainable before Consumer Forum. By virtue of Section-3 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 or Sections-173, 174 and 175 of Electricity Act, 2003, Consumer Forum cannot derive power to adjudicate a dispute in relation to assessment made U/s.126, or offences U/s.135 to 140 of Electricity Act, as the acts of indulging in “unauthorized use of electricity” do not fall within the meaning of “complaint” as defined U/s. 2(1) (c) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

                    7. So, now on careful consideration of all the materials available in the case record and on the basis of principle laid down by the above Authority as discussed earlier, this Forum come to the conclusion that this Consumer case is not maintainable in this Forum, for which the Complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed for and accordingly, this Consumer case is liable to be dismissed. However, the Complainant is at liberty to approach the appropriate authority along with an application for condonation of delay, if desired/ required. Hence, Ordered:-

                                                     O R D E R

                         The Consumer case is dismissed on contest against the O.Ps No.1 to 3 and on ex-parte against the O.Ps No.4 and 5, but in the peculiar circumstances without cost.

                         Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 19th day of March, 2019 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.