The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps, where O.P No.1 is the Junior Manager, Electrical, Baliapal (NESCO), O.P No.2 is the Assessment Officer, Electrical, Jamsuli Electrical Sub-Division (NESCO), O.P No.3 is the Executive Engineer, B.T.E.D, Basta (NESCO) and O.P No.4 is the Chief Executive Officer, NESCO, Balasore.   

                    2. The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant is a bonafide domestic Consumer under the O.Ps bearing Consumer No.JBD-1492 and was paying electric bills regularly. The Complainant received a demand notice on 18.12.2013 from the O.Ps for provisional assessment U/s.126 of Electricity Act-2003 due to unauthorised use of electricity by the Complainant and penalty amounting of Rs.60,624/- (Rupees Sixty thousand six hundred twenty four) only and also the O.Ps have called for the Complainant to file objection against the said provisional assessment on or before 09.01.2014, for which the Complainant has appeared before the O.Ps with his objection. But, instead of hearing, the O.Ps have issued a notice to the concerned person of the Department for replacement of the meter along with disconnection of power supply to the house of the Complainant, which causes mental agony and harassment to the Complainant. The illegal, arbitrary and whimsical assessment amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice by the O.Ps. Cause of action arose on 18.12.2013. The Complainant has prayed for waiving out the illegal assessed amount along with compensation for mental agony and harassment.

                    3. Though the O.Ps No.1 to 3 appeared in this case, but they have not filed their written version. But, the O.P No.3 has filed a written objection to the interim petition along with certain documents like spot verification report, provisional assessment order and final assessment order. Further, the O.Ps No.1 to 3 have filed written argument on the point of maintainability.

                    4. Though sufficient opportunities were given to O.P No.4, but he neither appeared nor filed his written version in this case. The O.P No.4 is set ex-parte.

                    5. In order to substantiate their claim, both the Parties have filed certain documents as per list. Perused the documents filed. It has been argued on behalf of the Complainant that on 18.12.2013, he received a demand notice of provisional assessment order U/s.126 of Electricity Act-2003 due to unauthorised use of electricity from the O.Ps demanding penalty of Rs.60,624/- (Rupees Sixty thousand six hundred twenty four) only. Thereafter, the Complainant has appeared before the O.Ps along with his objection against the provisional assessment order. But, the O.Ps have directed their Officials for replacement of the meter and also to disconnect the power supply to the house of the Complainant, for which the Complainant has filed this case praying for waiving out the illegal assessed amount along with compensation. Further, it has been argued that the Complainant is not complaining against assessment, but he is complaining against deficiency of service against the O.Ps regarding faulty/ defective electrical meter. On the other hand, the O.P No.4 is set ex-parte as mentioned earlier. It has been argued on behalf of the O.Ps No.1 to 3 that it is a case U/s.126 of Electricity Act-2003 for unauthorized use of electricity and there is an assessment, for which this case is not maintainable before this Consumer Forum and 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. So, 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.

                    6. 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 O.Ps No.1 to 3 and on ex-parte against O.P No.4, but in the peculiar circumstances without cost.  

                         Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 17th day of July, 2018 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.