KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSALCOMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
APPEAL NO 645/2004
JUDGMENT DATED 24.3.2011
SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER
SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER
APPELLANT
1. The Asst. Executive Engineer,
Kerala State Electricity Board, Burnassery, Kannur.
2. The Secretary,
K.S.E. Board, Thiruvananthapruam
(Rep. by Adv. B. Sakthidharan Nair)
RESPONDENTS
P.P. Ummerkutty,
Brigade Centre, Fort Road,Kannur.
(Rep. by Adv. V. Krishna Menon)
SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER
This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Kannur dated 28.5.2004. The opposite parties are the appellants. The respondent is the complainant. Appellant prefers this appeal under the order of the Forum below that the opposite parties directed to reconnect the dismantled service connection immediately and pay an amount of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation along with litigation expenses of Rs. 250/- within one month.
In short the complainant filed a complaint with the allegation that a bill was issued by the opposite party to the complainant for Rs. 78,678/- on the ground that the meter was faulty and their prayer is that to set aside the impugned bill and to allow compensation and costs. Hence the complaint.
The opposite party filed version and they stated that the disputed additional bill was issued for excess consumption of electrical energy from the date of 4/99 to 4/2000. The opposite parties admitted that the complainant is a consumer of the opposite parties. The meter was replaced on 1989,1999 and the reading was zero and cut of reading was taken on 6.4.2000 and the reading was 9559. The arrear bill was issued as per the average consumption. The complainant remitted Rs. 2,000/-as testing fee on 25.7.2000 and the meter was taken for testing on 4.8.2000 after providing a new meter On testing it, it has revealed that the meter was not faulty. The test result was acknowledged by the complainant.
The complainant did not invoke the remedy provided under Section, 26(6)of the I.E. Act. 1910. The complainant did not remit the amount and the connection was disconnected on 24.8.2000. The appellant/opposite parties contended that they acted only as per the Rules. They alleged that the complainant used electric connection for construction purpose. Revenue Recovery proceedings were also initiated. Hence they prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
The evidence consist of Ext. A1 to A5 marked for the complainant and marked Ext. B1 to B3 on the side of the opposite parties.
The Forum considered the entire evidence and heard in detail both sides, passed above impugned order. In the result, the Forum below allowed the complaint.
On this day this appeal came before this Commission for final hearing. The counsel for the appellant and the respondent appeared and argued their own respective cases. The counsel for the appellant argued that disputed bill was issued as per Rules 31( c ) of the CSEE and the complainant was direct to pay the amount covered by the bill. The Forum below wrongly appreciated the evidence adduced by both sides and passed the impugned order without the principles of law and evidence. Hence the counsel for the appellant argued for set aside the impugned order passed by the Forum below by allowing this appeal. But the counsel for the respondent/complainant argued that the Forum below rightly passed the order accordance with the law and evidence. Thus they prayed for the dismissal of the appeal. We perused the entire evidence from the case bundle.
Heard both sides.
We are seeing that the additional bill is to be issued once in six months after verifying the meter reading of average consumption and connecting loads to the consumers, until them to pay the bill in proper time without much difficulty. We don’t know what is the difficulty of the servants attached with the Electricity board inspect the premises of the consumers and record readings from the meter and to issue detailed bill timely? Unfortunately we are seeing that the servants of the board are sitting in their office and simply multiplying the average consumption with a figure on their whims and fancies and issuing additional bills and disconnecting the electricity. If the consumer is not paying the additional bills which were issued by the opposite parties without verifying the records. Suppose it was done in proper time definitely the consumer also get a chance for the payment of the same without much difficulty. It is nothing but an unfair trade practice and against the natural justice. Serve a bill for a huge amount in one morning like 84,150/-, the consumers will be in a dialama. How they will remit such an amount. It is against public interest. The arrogant attitude of the public servants is one of the reason for the increase of the suicide rate in the state of Kerala. In kerala, every one hour 27 persons are committing suicide. It is highest percentage in the country. We don’t know why the higher officials of the KSE Board is protecting them. These are the main reasons for the litigations and the KSE Board is spending much more money for the same. As per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court Gulbir Singh Vs. Gaziabad Developing Authority, if any deficiency which caused due to the negligence or carelessness of the public officer and it caused heavy loss to the public amount, it shall be recovered from such an officer. In other words he is personally liable for this. In any way we are not directing to recover the compensation and cost from the aggrieved officer in this case. The spirit of the decision of the Apex court means the government money is public money. But we are directing the Secretary, Kerala State Electricity Board to circulate these directions among the concerned officers for better service. In other words they will be legally liable to pay the loss sustained by them to the public exchequer.
We are not seeing that any reason to the interference in the impugned order passed by the Forum below. The Forum below rightly answered all questions and reached in a right conclusion. It resulted the order. The Forum below showed their social commitment as per the highly benefited social legislation like C.P. Act.
In the result, this appeal is dismissed and confirmed the order passed by the Forum below. We directed both parties to suffer their respective costs. We are directing the registrar of this Commission to forward the copy of this judgment to the Secretary, Kerala State Electricity Board for necessary action.
The points of the appeal discussed one by one and answered accordingly.
M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER
M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER
ST
