Heard learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondent.

2.              This appeal is  filed  U/S-15 of erstwhile  Consumer Protection Act,1986(herein-after called the Act). Hereinafter, the parties to this appeal shall be referred to  with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.

3.                      The unfolded story    of the complainant, is that the complainant  is a consumer under the OP. It is alleged inter-alia that the complainant  was availing power supply directly by hooking  from  the LT line  and they detected  same by making inspection. But   the penal amount was objected by the complainant. Inspite of repeated objection the notice was issued  for disconnection. Since, the complainant is aggrieved  by the notice and the penal assessment, he filed the complaint case.

4.            The  OP    filed written version stating that  as the complainant was using electricity by hooking process, they have inspected the premises and found that the complainant was using electricity by such unauthorized  hooking process. So, they imposed the penal assessment and after  the objection filed they have  dispose of same by filing final bill. But the OP have acted  upon US/126 of the Indian Electricity Act,2003. So, they submitted that the complaint is not maintainable and the assessment of penal bill is justified and  appropriate.  Therefore, they have submitted to set-aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal.

5.                       After hearing both the parties, learned District Forum   passed the following order:-

               Xxxx              xxxx              xxxx

                              “In view of our observations, we direct the OPs not to collect the penal  dues amounting  to Rs.25,400/- and the rest of the amount is to be realized from the complainant as per his consumption reflect6ed in the matter.

                      Thus, the case is disposed of but under the circumstances, without cost and compensation.”

6.               Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that complaint is not maintainable in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in U.P.Power Corporation Ltd.-Vrs-Anis Ahamed AIR 2013 SC -2766.According    to him, there is already  proceeding U/S-126 of the Indian Electricity Act and there is unauthorized use of energy by the complainant, the complaint is not maintainable.

7.                      Considered the submission  of learned counsel for the appellant, perused the DFR and impugned order.       

8.                 No doubt  the verification report  is filed. On perusal of the same it appears that on 01.03.2006 the officer concerned has investigated the  place  and found that the complainant was using  electricity by hooking process. Although the complainant is a consumer but  he  not authorized to directly obtain the electricity unauthorizedly. It appears that they have already imposed penalty for Rs.25,400/-  and the order has been passed U/S126 of the  Indian Electricity Act,2003. The letter has been  issued to the complainant who has already filed the objection. The final order has not been passed because in the meantime  he has filed the complaint case. It is well settled in the decision of U.P.Power Corporation Ltd.(Supra )  that if there is any unauthorized use of energy or tampering of meter or theft of energy then, the consumer complaint is not maintainable and the parties concerned can file the case against appropriate authority under the provision of   the Indian Electricity Act. Here, in the instant case  not only unauthorized use of energy but also theft of energy by the complainant is gross negligence on the part of the complainant. The theft of energy or use of energy without any sort of consent or information  to the Op-licensee is also negligence on the part of the complainant.  Be that as it may, it is  the case of the O.P. that learned District Forum has not applied judicial mind to the fact and law involved in this case. When the consumer complaint is not maintainable, the question of awarding any relief to the complainant does not arise.

9.            In view of above, we are of view    that the impugned order is illegal and improper  and as such it is set-aside and it is set-aside.

                  Appeal stands allowed. No cost.

                   Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the confonet  or webtsite of this  Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.   

                     DFR be sent back forthwith.

                     Statutory amount be refunded.