DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BATHINDA (PUNJAB)<br /> <br /> CC. No. 77 of 10-03-2009<br /> Decided on : 20-07-2009 <br /> <br /> Sampat Ram S/o Baghelu Ram aged about 72 years R/o H. No. 33874, Street No. 17, Partap Nagar, Bathinda. .... Complainant<br /> Versus<br /> <br /> 1.Chairman/Secretary, Punjab State Electricity Board, The Mall, Patiala.<br /> 2.S.D.O. Punjab State Electricity Board, Sub Division, Multania Road, Bathinda.<br /> ... Opposite parties<br /> <br /> Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection<br /> Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> QUORUM <br /> <br /> Sh. George, President<br /> Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member <br /> Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member<br /> <br /> For the Complainant : Sh. J.N. Sharma, Advocate, counsel for the complainant<br /> For the Opposite parties : Sh.Rajneesh Rampal,Advocate counsel for the opposite parties. <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> GEORGE, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> 1. Sh. Sampat Ram, complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Here-in-after referred to as 'Act') with the allegations against the opposite parties that he has electric connection bearing account No. B14AN210030H and he continued to receive regular bills and status of his electric meter was 'OK' till 15-05-2008. The opposite parties issued bill dated 15-05-2008 on average basis showing old units as 4000 and new as 4496 and status of the meter as 'D' which mens 'meter defective'. Immediately on receipt this bill, he met the officials of the opposite parties and enquired about the status of his electric meter. He was told that due to clerical mistake, status of his electric meter has been shown as 'defective'. However, he moved an application on 27-08-2008 for checking his electric meter and also deposited the required fee of Rs. 120/- as per receipt No. 139 dated 27-08-2008. The opposite parties never removed the said meter for the purpose of checking. He received next bill dated 17-10-2008 with code “D” and deposited half of the amount of bill i.e. Rs. 4,000/- on 04-09-2008. The next bill dated 16-12-2008 was issued to him on average basis showing status of the meter as 'D' and the same was also paid by the complainant on 23-12-2008. He made several requests before the opposite parties for checking of his electric meter. On 23-12-2009, his electric meter was removed and it was packed in his presence. At the time of removal of the meter, its reading was 5999, but the said meter was neither sent to M.E. Lab nor any information was given to him in this connection. He received another bill dated 14-02-2009 for Rs. 11,954/- on average basis showing status of the meter as 'C' which means 'meter changed', from the opposite parties despite the fact that old meter was removed and new meter was installed. The bills are not being issued by the opposite parties on consumption basis. He assets that this act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service and mal-practice on their part. He made several requests before the opposite parties that he may be sent actual consumption bills as new meter has been installed, but to no effect. He was threatened by the opposite parties that if the payment of the bill is not made, his electric connection will be disconnected and therefore, he had to file the present complaint. He has prayed for that the bill dated 14-02-2009 for an amount of Rs. 11,954/- issued by the opposite parties on average basis, may be quashed and opposite parties may be directed to serve upon him an actual consumption bill for payment and he should also be paid adequate and reasonable amount of compensation on account of harassment and metal tension etc., In addition to this, he is also entitled for litigation expenses.<br /> 2. The opposite parties contested the allegations raising inter-alia legal objections that; complainant has no locus standi or cause of action; complaint is not maintainable and the complaint has been filed on false facts and is liable to be dismissed.<br /> On merits, allegations of the complainant are not admitted as correct. However, it is averred that the complainant was issued actual consumption bills till May, 2008 but the bill in the month of May, 2008 was issued to the complainant on average basis showing status of the meter as 'D' as there was some defect in his electric meter. They admitted that the complainant moved an application for checking of his meter and deposited an amount of Rs. 120/-. The electric meter of the complainant was duly removed on 23-12-2008 from the premises of the complainant after following proper procedure of P.S.E.B. The removed meter was duly packed in a cardboard box in the presence of the complainant and the same is still lying deposited with them in packed and sealed condition and will be sent to M.E. Lab as per rules and procedure after giving information to the complainant as per procedure.<br /> 3. Both the parties in order to prove their respective contentions have led respective evidence.<br /> 4. The complainant Sh. Sampat Ram has filed his two affidavits Ex. C-1 & Ex. C-2, photocopy of payment receipt Ex. C-3, photocopy of his affidavit Ex. C-4, photocopy of payment receipt Ex. C-5, bill Ex. C-7, photocopies of bills Ex. C-6, Ex. C-8 to Ex. C-11 and payment receipts Ex. C-12 to Ex. C-15.<br /> 5. To controvert the evidence of the complainant, the opposite parties produced on record affidavit of Sh. Surinder Pal Singh, A.A.E. Ex. R-1 and consumption data Ex. R-2. <br /> 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record of the case.<br /> 7. It appears from the record that the complainant moved an application with the opposite parties in May, 2008 when the status of his<br /> meter was shown in the bill as 'D' and deposited an amount of Rs. 120/- being the required fee for checking of the meter. It was incumbent upon the opposite parties to take off the meter of the complainant immediately within a week period from the date the complainant moved an application for checking of the meter, but the opposite parties have shown relaxity on their part and instead, they continued to send electricity bill to the complainant on average basis not only till December, 2008 when the old meter was replaced with a new one but also thereafter till March, 2009, as is evident from consumption data of the complainant Ex. R-2 brought on record by the opposite parties. Paras No. 64.6 and 71.2.2 of the Sales Regulations of the opposite parties are reproduced hereunder :<br /> Para No. 64.6<br /> “ After removing the old meter, it should be replaced with a new meter after charging the meter charging fee. The meter on removal should be sent to the ME. Laboratory within a maximum period of 15 days and account of the consumer should be adjusted immediately on receipt of the test results from the ME. Lab.”<br /> Para No. 71.2.2<br /> “In case the consumer does not accept the readings of the check <br /> meter or insists in the very beginning to send the challenged meter to ME Laboratory, he should deposit the meter challenge fee. After the challenge fee is received, the meter should be sent to the <br /> ME Lab promptly after removal but in no case it should be delayed beyond a period of fifteen days from the date of removal of the meter from the consumer's premises. While sending the challenged meters to the ME Lab this fact must be clearly indicated on the MCO and AE/AEE ME be requested for intimation of test results at the earliest. After the meter is received in the Laboratory, it should be promptly tested and test results intimated to the AE/AEE/XEN (Ops.) concerned by M.E. Lab within a maximum period of seven days from the date of receipt of the meter in the laboratory. The AE/AEE/XEN (Ops.) will then immediately intimate the result to the consumer and after getting his acceptance adjust the accounts accordingly. The whole process should, in no case, take more than a month.” <br /> 8. It has been admitted by the opposite parties in paras No. 1, 2 & 3 in their reply that the complainant moved an application for checking of the meter and he also deposited an amount of Rs. 120/- for the said purpose and his defective meter was removed on 23-12-2008. His old meter was duly packed in a cardboard box in the presence of the complainant and the meter in sealed condition is still lying deposited with the opposite parties meaning thereby that the electric meter was removed from the premises of the complainant on 23-12-2008 and it was packed and sealed in a cardboard box but has not been sent to M.E. Laboratory till date. For what reasons, it has not been sent and has been kept by the opposite parties with them has not been explained either in the reply of the opposite parties or in the evidence brought on record by them whereas as per para No. 64.6 of the Sales Regulation, after removing the old meter, it should be replaced with a new meter after charging the meter checking fee and the removed meter should be sent to M.E. Lab within a maximum period of 15 days and the account of the consumer should be adjusted immediately. Despite this statutory rule as to why this has not been complied with by the opposite parties remained unexplained.<br /> 9. As per para No. 71.2.2 of the Sales Regulations, the whole process should be in no case take more than a month. It appears that the opposite parties are not taking any due care to follow the Sales Regulations referred to herein which are not merely guidelines for the opposite parties but also have been framed with a view to protect the consumer from unnecessary harassment and burdening them by serving bills on average basis without following the procedure laid down in these regulations. The opposite parties are violating the regulations with impunity and causing unnecessary mental tension, harassment and inconvenience to the complainant by calling upon him to pay bills on average basis.<br /> 10. Under these circumstances, the complainant is entitled for reimbursement of excess amount, if any, paid by him than the actual consumption of electric energy from May, 2008 onwards till date and he is also not legally bound to make the payment of bill dated 14-02-2009 for an amount of Rs. 11,954/-. He is also entitled for refund of the amount with interest @9% P.A. from the date of deposit till refund, if any deposited by him as per order of this Forum dated 13-03-2009. Since the complainant made repeated requests for removing his defective meter and he also deposited required fee for checking of his electric meter for sending the same to ME. Lab but the opposite parties have not shown any sensitivity and therefore, they put the complainant to unnecessary mental tension, harassment and inconvenience by sending him bills on average basis and making him to deposit the amount illegally demanded and as such, the complainant is definitely entitled for reasonable amount of compensation which we assess as Rs.1,000/- alongwith litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 500/-. <br /> The compliance of this order be made within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.<br /> Pronounced :<br /> 20-07-2009 (George)<br /> President<br /> <br /> (Dr. Phulinder Preet) (Amarjeet Paul) Member Member <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />