The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps, where O.P No.1 is the North Eastern Electricity Supply Company of Orissa Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director, Corporate Office, Januganj, Balasore and O.P No.2 is the S.D.O (Electrical Sub-Division), NESCO, Jaleswar, Balasore.

                    2. The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant is the son of Chatturbhuja Acharya, who was a domestic Consumer under the O.Ps of 1.5 K.W bearing Consumer No.HBD-010, new A/c No.323113020098 and paying electric bills regularly. But, the father of the Complainant died in 2011. But on 23.11.2013, the Officials of NESCO prepared spot verification and falsely reported that the present Consumer has been using the electricity unauthorisedly by tempering the body seal and the meter. A copy of spot verification report was delivered to the Complainant, who received the same under protest. Thus, the Complainant requested to O.P No.2 in writing to withdraw/ drop such allegations, but the O.P No.2 without giving any opportunities, issued electric bill for December-2013 on 22.01.2014 of Rs.20,939/- (Rupees Twenty thousand nine hundred thirty nine) only fixing the date of payment to 31.01.2014 without any basis. Thereby, the Complainant approached O.P No.2 to revise the erroneous bill, but the O.P No.2 without revision of such bill, allowed the Complainant to pay Rs.200/- (Rupees Two hundred) only and accordingly, the Complainant paid Rs.200/- (Rupees Two hundred) only on 30.01.2014 for December-2013. Thereafter, the O.P No.2 threatened the Complainant on 25.02.2014 to pay a sum of Rs.20,939/- (Rupees Twenty thousand nine hundred thirty nine) only or else, power supply will be disconnected to his premises, which is illegal and arbitrary also, causing mental agony to the Complainant. Thus, the Complainant filed this case for necessary relief. The Complainant has prayed for revision of electric bill for the month of December-2013 along with compensation for mental agony. Neither the Complainant nor his Advocate was present at the time of hearing of this case.

                    3. Though sufficient opportunities were given to O.P No.1, but he has not appeared in this case. The O.P No.1 is also set ex-parte.      

                    4. Written version filed by O.P No.2 through his Advocate denying on the point of maintainability as well as jurisdiction. The O.P No.2 has further submitted that the Complainant is a domestic Consumer bearing Consumer No.HBD-0102 with contract demand of 1.5 K.W. On 23.11.2013, the O.P No.2 along with his other staff verified the premises of the Complainant in presence of him and found that the energy meter was defective. The Complainant was availing power supply illegally and unauthorisedly by tempering the seal of the meter and service wire was cut before the meter. Thus, a spot verification report was prepared on 23.11.2013, which was duly signed by the Complainant. Basing on the spot verification report, a provisional assessment order U/s.126 of Electricity Act-2003 was prepared for Rs.20,804/- (Rupees Twenty thousand eight hundred four) only and served to the Complainant vide letter No.2138, dtd.03.12.2013. Accordingly, the final assessment order was prepared for Rs.20,804/- (Rupees Twenty thousand eight hundred four) only and served to the Complainant vide letter No.2389, dtd.30.12.2013. The Complainant has failed to deposit the final assessment amount within the stipulated date. When there is provision for appeal after final order made U/s.126 of the Electricity Act-2003 within 30 days of the said order for redressal of grievances (if any) of the Complainant to an appellate authority and the Complainant without availing remedies available in the statute U/s.127 of I.E Act-2003, he has filed this case before this Forum. In addition, a “complaint” against the assessment made by the assessing Officer U/s.126 or against the offences committed U/s.135 to 140 of the Electricity Act-2003 is not maintainable before a Consumer Forum.

                    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) 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 is his case. According to his pleading, on 23.11.2013, the Officials of NESCO prepared a spot verification and falsely reported that the Complainant has been using the electricity unauthorisedly by tempering the body seal and the meter. A copy of spot verification report was delivered to the Complainant, who received the same under protest. Thus, the Complainant requested to O.P No.2 to withdraw such allegations, but the O.P No.2 did not pay any heed to it, rather issued electric bill for December-2013 on 22.01.2014 for Rs.20,939/- (Rupees Twenty thousand nine hundred thirty nine) only. Thereafter, the Complainant approached O.P No.2 to revise the erroneous bill, but the O.P No.2 did not revise the same and also allowed him to pay Rs.200/- (Rupees Two hundred) only and accordingly, the Complainant has paid Rs.200/- (Rupees Two hundred) only on 30.01.2014. Then, the O.P No.2 threatened the Complainant on 25.02.2014 to pay Rs.20,939/- (Rupees Twenty thousand nine hundred thirty nine) only or else, power supply will be disconnected to his premises, which is illegal and arbitrary also, causing mental agony to the Complainant. Thus, the Complainant has filed this case praying for revision of electric bill for the month of December-2013 along with compensation. On the other hand, O.P No.1 is set ex-parte as mentioned earlier and it has been argued on behalf of O.P No.2 that on 23.11.2013, the O.P No.2 along with his other staff verified the premises of the Complainant in presence of the Complainant, where they have found that the energy meter was defective and the Complainant was availing power supply illegally and unauthorisedly by tempering the seal of the meter and service wire was cut before the meter. Thus, a spot verification report was prepared on 23.11.2013, which was duly signed by the Complainant. Thereafter, observing necessary formalities of Law, provisional assessment U/s. 126 of Electricity Act-2003 was prepared for an amount of Rs.20,804/- (Rupees Twenty thousand eight hundred four) only, which was served to the Complainant vide letter No.2138, dtd.03.12.2013 and accordingly, the same amount has been assessed as final assessment order, which was also served to the Complainant vide letter No.2389, dtd.30.12.2013. The Complainant has neither complied the order 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.

                    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 ex-parte against O.P No.1 and on contest against O.P No.2, but in the peculiar circumstances without cost.  

                         Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 11th day of April, 2018 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.