DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BATHINDA (PUNJAB)<br /> <br /> CC No. 30 of 24-01-2008<br /> Decided on : 31-03-2008<br /> <br /> Gamdoor Singh aged about 45 years S/o Sh. Lachman Singh R/o Patti Soal, Mehraj District Bathinda. ... Complainant<br /> Versus<br /> <br /> 1.Punjab State Electricity Board, The Mall, Patiala through its Secretary.<br /> 2.SDO/AEE, P.S.E.B, Suburban Sud Division, PSEB Rampura Phul.<br /> <br /> ...Opposite parties<br /> <br /> Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection<br /> Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> QUORUM :<br /> Sh. Lakhbir Singh, President<br /> Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member<br /> <br /> For the Complainant : Sh.Ashok Gupta, Advocate.<br /> For the Opposite parties : Sh. R.D. Goyal, Advocate. <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> LAKHBIR SINGH, PRESIDENT<br /> 1. Complainant is holder of Domestic electric connection bearing A/c No. ML-43/0196 P with connected load of 3.46 KW at his residential premises. He is paying the electricity consumption charges regularly. Nothing is outstanding. Memo No 2487 dated 5.12.07 was received by him vide which opposite parties raised demand of Rs. 3843/- from him. It is averred by the complainant that meter installed in his premises was O.K. He did not commit theft of electricity. Demand raised is illegal, unjustified and against rules and regulations. No checking of the connection was made in his presence. No official of the opposite parties ever pointed out any defect in the working of the meter although it was being checked from time to time. Opposite parties are threatening to disconnect the electricity connection in case this amount is not deposited. In these circumstances, he alleges deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Here-in-after referred to as 'Act') has been preferred by him seeking direction from this Forum to the opposite parties to withdraw this Memo dated 5.12.07; pay him Rs. 5,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension, harassment and botheration besides cost of the complaint.<br /> 2. Opposite parties filed their version taking legal objections that this Forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint as Sub Divisional Magistrate has authority to hear the appeal against the final order; complaint is not maintainable; complainant has no locus standi and cause of action to file it and he has not come to this Forum with clean hands. Inter-alia their plea is that on 4.12.07, connection of the complainant was checked by Sh. Baldev Singh, A.J.E. in the presence of the complainant and it was found that he was using electricity by laying wire from joint of main PVC and meter was intentionally stopped. He was committing theft of electricity. Checking report was prepared. Complainant had refused to sign it. On the basis of checking, provisional order of assessment was made and Memo No. 2487 dated 5.12.07 was issued raising demand of Rs. 3843/-. Complainant is liable to pay this amount. They deny the remaining averments in the complaint.<br /> 3. In support of his averments contained in the complaint, complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavits (Ex. C-1 & Ex. C-2), affidavits of S/Sh. Naib Singh and Rajvir Singh (Ex. C-3 & Ex. C-4) respectively, photocopies of bills dated 17.3.07 and 16.9.07 (Ex. C-5 & Ex. C-6) respectively and photocopy of memo No. 2474 dated 512.07 have been tendered in evidence.<br /> 4. In rebuttal, on behalf of the opposite parties affidavits Ex. R-1 & Ex. R-2 of S/Sh. Sarabjit Singh, S.D.O. and Baldev Singh, AJ.E. Respectively, photocopy of checking report dated 4.12.07 (Ex. R-3) and photocopy of Provisional order memo (Ex. R-4) have been tendered in evidence. <br /> 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Besides this, we have gone through the record.<br /> 6. Allegation levelled against the complainant by the opposite parties is of theft of energy. Heavy onus is upon the opposite parties to prove it by way of leading cogent and convincing evidence. For this, there is bald affidavit of Sh. Baldev Singh, A.J.E. which is Ex. R-2 according to which connection was checked by him on 4.12.07 and complainant was found using electricity after laying wire from the main PVC. Meter was lying stopped. So far as affidavit Ex. R-1 of Sh. Sarabjit Singh, Sub Divisional Officer is concerned, he was not with the checking party. Affidavit Ex. R-2 stands amply rebutted with the affidavits Ex. C-1 & Ex. C-2 of the complainant, Ex. C-3 & Ex. C-4 of S/Sh. Naib Singh and Rajvir Singh respectively. Complainant reiterates his averments in the complaint. S/Sh. Naib Singh and Rajvir Singh testified that complainant was not using electricity directly from the main PVC. If complainant was using electricity by way of bye passing the electric meter, opposite parties could take PVC wire into possession. No reason has been assigned as to why this was not done. Charge of theft of energy is a criminal charge and strict proof is required to establish it as is required before a criminal court. As per checking report, copy of which is Ex. R-3 complainant refused to sign it. Likewise is the affidavit of Sh. Baldev Singh, A.J.E. If complainant had refused to sign the checking report, Sh. Baldev Singh should have proceeded as per commercial circular No. 53/2006. He should have pasted copy of the inspection report at a conspicuous place in/outside the premises of the complainant. Simultaneously, copy of inspection report should have been sent to the complainant under registered post. It is further in this commercial circular that in case of theft of electricity is established, supply of such premises should be disconnected forthwith and meter/metering equipment should be sealed in as found condition in order to take further action. All this has not been done and it gives the inference that complainant was not committing theft of electricity. Had he been committing theft of energy, Sh. Baldev Singh should have complied with the provisions of this commercial circular. In this view of the matter, we are fortified by the observations of the Hon'ble State Commission in the case of Charan Singh Vs. Punjab State Electricity Board (Chairman) and another 2006(1) Judicial Reports Consumer 206. When there is non-compliance of commercial circular of the Punjab State Electricity Board and there is no satisfactory evidence of the opposite parties about alleged theft of electricity, demand raised by the opposite parties through impugned Memo No. 2487, copy of which is Ex. C-7 is certainly illegal and is liable to be set aside. Deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in raising this illegal demand is proved.<br /> 7. Now question arises as to which relief should be accorded to the complainant. In view of our foregoing discussion, direction deserves to be given to the opposite parties to withdraw the demand raised through Memo No. 2487 dated 5.12.07. Complainant is craving for compensation of Rs. 5,000/- for mental tension, harassment and botheration. As the act and conduct of the opposite parties in raising demand is illegal, complainant must have undergone mental tension, harassment and botheration. He has to knock the door of this Forum for getting his grievances redressed. In these circumstances, some compensation is warranted to him from the opposite parties which we assess as Rs. 500/-.<br /> 8. In the result, complaint is allowed against the opposite parties with cost of Rs. 1,000/-. Opposite parties are directed to as under :-<br /> i) Withdraw the impugned memo No. 2487 dated 5.12.07 whereby demand of Rs. 3843/- has been raised. <br /> ii) Pay Rs. 500/- to the complainant as compensation under Section 14(1)(d) of the Act.<br /> Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of its receipt failing which the amount of compensation under Section 14(1)(d) would carry interest @ 9% P.A. till payment.<br /> Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned. <br /> Pronounced :<br /> 31-03-2008 (Lakhbir Singh )<br /> President<br /> <br /> <br /> ( Dr. Phulinder Preet)<br /> Member