Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Room No. 208 2^nd Floor, District Administrative Complex, Tarn Taran

Consumer Complaint No  :   57 of 2018

Date of Institution                      : 29.05.2018

Date of Decision               : 27.08.2019

Boota Ram son of Suraaj Dass alias Sarain Singh resident of Ward No. 13 Patti, Basti Meeran Wali Patti, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran.

                                                ...Complainant

Versus

1. Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited Patiala through its M.D/ Chairman/ authorized signatory.
2. Executive Engineer, Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited Patti, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran,
3. Sub Divisional Officer, Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited Patti, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran.

…Opposite Parties.

Complaint Under Section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Quorum:               Sh. Charanjit Singh, President

Smt. Jaswinder Kaur, Member

For Complainant                     Sh. Harjit Singh Advocate

For Opposite Parties               Sh. A.K. Sharma Advocate

ORDERS:

Charanjit Singh, President;

1        The complainant Boota Ram has filed the present complaint under Section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (herein after called as 'the Act') against Punjab State Power Corporations Ltd. Patiala and others (Opposite Parties) on the allegations of deficiency in service and negligence in service on the part of opposite parties with prayer to withdraw the bill dated 16.5.2018 for a period w.e.f. 15.3.2018 to 16.5.2018 of Rs. 80,460/- and to pay Rs. 25,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony and Rs. 25,000/- as litigation expenses.

2        The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is very poor person and belongs to Schedule Caste Community and is only bread winner in his family. The complainant is the holder of electric connection bearing account No. T42WM261196N and the said connection is domestic connection and the same is installed in his house since a long time.  There is policy of Punjab Govt. that 200 units of electricity to the schedule caste person is exempted in every month. And concession of 200 units in every month is being given to the complainant in his previous bills. In this way, the complainant is entitled to use the 400 units free/ under concession in every bill for a period of two months. Meaning thereby that the Punjab Govt. is giving relaxation of 400 units against the bill of 2 months. The average electricity consumption of the complainant is in between 100 to 200 units in every month. The concession of units of electricity to the complainant in every month is up to 200 units and the bill of the complainant is coming ‘0’ (Zero). The meter status is shown in the bills ‘OK’. Whenever, the bill comes above 200 units per month, then the complainant has made the payment of the same to the opposite parties. The complainant has made the payment of bill to the opposite parties of Rs. 400/- on 24.1.2017 and Rs. 100/- on 27.7.2017. The complainant astonished to know that the opposite parties have issued a bill dated 16.5.2018 for a period w.e.f. 15.3.2018 to 16.5.2018 of Rs. 80,460/- for 62 days and shown the consumption of 887 units which is totally wrong. The complainant belongs to Schedule Caste and he is a very poor person and he did not use any electricity showing 887 units. The average bill comes of the complainant between 100 to 120 units in every month and how the complainant has consumed the electricity of 887 units and it is not possible. The reading of the present bill in dispute does not tally/ carry with the previous bills of the complainant. The previous bills of the complainant are showing the reading as 25198 to onwards and the bill in question is showing the reading 8795 to 9682. The complainant has not used the electricity of 887 units as alleged by the opposite parties. The opposite parties have also given the concession of 400 units in this bill also. The opposite parties illegally sent the bill for Rs. 80,460/- to the complainant who is a very poor person and is unable to pay the same to the opposite parties. If we see the bills of the complainant of past time, it shows that the complainant never used the electricity above 200-250 units in every month. Since the installation of electricity, the complainant has been regularly paying he consumption charges without committing any default.   The bill in question is quite wrong, illegal, arbitrary and very excessive. This amount has been illegally added in the current bill. This act of the opposite parties constitutes deficiency in services, unfair trade practice. Feeling dissatisfied by the act and conduct of the opposite parties, the complainant perforce has filed this complaint against the opposite parties.  Alongwith the complaint, the complainant has filed his self attested affidavit Ex. C-1, Self attested Schedule Caste Certificate Ex. C-2, Self attested copy of receipt dated 24.1.2017 for Rs. 400/- Ex. C-3, self attested copy of receipt dated 27.7.2017 for Rs. 100/-  Ex. C-4, Self attested copy of Bill dated 25.1.2017 Ex. C-5, Self attested copy of Bill dated 17.7.2017 Ex. C-6, Self attested copy of bill dated 20.11.2017 Ex. C-7, Self attested copy of Bill dated 16.5.2018 Ex. C-8.

3        After formal admission of the complaint, notice was issued to Opposite Parties and Opposite Parties appeared through counsel and filed written version admitted that the complainant is holder of electric connection bearing account No. 3000260337 (wrongly written as T42WM261196N) and the said connection is domestic connection and the same is installed in his house since a long time.  The complainant was using more than 200 units per month. Bills of the complainant shows the consumption of electricity more than 200 units one month and complainant was using more than sanctioned loan and he has rightly been billed for Rs. 80,460/- and the complainant is legally liable to make the payment of the same to the opposite parties.  The opposite parties have denied the other contents of the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.  Alongwith the written version, the opposite party has placed on record the affidavit of Kashmira Lal SDO Ex. OP1,2,3/1.

4        The complainant has filed rejoinder and rebut the allegations as taken in the written version.

5        We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents placed on the file by the parties.

6        Ld. counsel for the complainant contended that the complainant is very poor person and belongs to Schedule Caste Community and certificate of the complainant regarding schedule caste is Ex. C-2 and is only bread winner in his family. The complainant is the holder of electric connection bearing account No. 3000260337 (wrongly written as T42WM261196N) and the said connection is domestic connection and the same is installed in his house since a long time.  He further contended that there is policy of Punjab Govt. that 200 units of electricity to the schedule caste person is exempted in every month. And concession of 200 units in every month is being given to the complainant in his previous bills. He further contended that the complainant is entitled to use the 400 units free/ under concession in every bill for a period of two months. Punjab Govt. is giving relaxation of 400 units against the bill of 2 months. The average electricity consumption of the complainant is in between 100 to 200 units in every month. The concession of units of electricity to the complainant in every month is up to 200 units and the bill of the complainant is coming ‘0’ (Zero). The meter status is shown in the bills ‘OK’. Whenever, the bill comes above 200 units per month, then the complainant has made the payment of the same to the opposite parties. The complainant has made the payment of bill to the opposite parties of Rs.400/- on 24.1.2017 Ex. C-3 and Rs. 100/- on 27.7.2017 Ex. C-4.  He further contended that the complainant astonished to know that the opposite parties have issued a bill dated 16.5.2018 for a period w.e.f. 15.3.2018 to 16.5.2018 of Rs. 80,460/- for 62 days Ex. C-8 and shown the consumption of 887 units which is totally wrong. He further contended that the complainant belongs to Schedule Caste and he is a very poor person and he did not use any electricity showing 887 units. The average bill comes of the complainant between 100 to 120 units in every month and how the complainant has consumed the electricity of 887 units and it is not possible. The reading of the present bill in dispute does not tally/ carry with the previous bills of the complainant. The complainant has not used the electricity of 887 units as alleged by the opposite parties. The opposite parties have also given the concession of 400 units in this bill also. He further contended that the opposite parties illegally sent the bill for Rs. 80,460/- to the complainant who is a very poor person and is unable to pay the same to the opposite parties. If we see the bills of the complainant of past time, it shows that the complainant never used the electricity above 200-250 units in every month. Ld. counsel for the complainant contended that the opposite parties have illegally claimed arrears of previous year of Rs. 59,540/- from the complainant in Bill Ex. C-8 and Ld. counsel for the complainant contended that the opposite party is not entitled to any amount of arrears of previous year from the complainant.  The bill in question is quite wrong, illegal, arbitrary and very excessive. This amount has been illegally added in the current bill. This act of the opposite parties constitutes deficiency in services, unfair trade practice.

7        Ld. counsel for the opposite parties contended that the complainant is holder of electric connection in question and the said connection is domestic connection and the same is installed in his house since a long time.  The complainant was using more than 200 units per month. He further contended that Bills of the complainant shows the consumption of electricity more than 200 units one month and complainant was using more than sanctioned loan and he has rightly been billed for Rs. 80,460/- and the complainant is legally liable to make the payment of the same to the opposite parties and prayed that the present complaint may be dismissed.

8        The stand of the opposite parties is that the complainant was using more than sanctioned load and he has rightly been billed for Rs. 80,460/- and the complainant is legally liable to make the payment of the same to the opposite parties.  But the opposite parties have not produced even iota of evidence which shows that the complainant was using more load than the load sanctioned. The complainant has produced on record his schedule Caste certificate Ex. C-2, Bill Ex. C-5 which shows the category of the connection in question WSD i.e. Weaker Section Discount and concession of units has also been given in Bill Ex. C-5, the complainant has also placed on record Bill Ex. C-6 which also shows the category WSD and concession of units has also been given in this bill. It all shows that opposite parties are giving concession of units to the complainant after admitting the complainant in weaker Section. The bill in question Ex. C-8 also shows that category as WSD in which the opposite party has claimed an amount of Rs. 80,460/-.  The opposite party has to give relaxation of 200 units in every month under Scheduled Caste Category.

9        The opposite party in Bill Ex. C-8 shows that arrears of Pre-Financial year is shown as 59540+10722+1186. But the opposite parties have failed to produce on record any other document showing the amount in question as arrears of bills of the complainant. On the other hands, the complainant argued that as per Electricity Supply Instruction Manual of opposite parties where regulation No. 93 is regarding payment of arrears not originally billed. Relevant regulation is reproduced hereunder:

Payment of Arrears not Originally Billed : 93.1 There may be certain cases where the consumer is billed for some of the dues relating to previous months/years or otherwise as arrears on account of under assessment/ unauthorized use of electricity or demand / load surcharge pointed out by Internal Auditor/ detected by the authorized officers either owing to negligence of the PSPCL employees or due to some defect in the metering equipment or due to application of wrong tariff/ multiplication factor or due to mistake in connection or other irregularities/malpractices etc. In all such cases, separate bills shall be issued giving complete details of the charges levied. Such charges shall be shown as arrears in the subsequent electricity bills regularly till the payment is made. Supplementary bills shall be issued separately giving complete details of the charges in regard to theft cases, slowness of meters, wrong connection of the meter and unauthorized use of electricity etc. In such cases, the copy of relevant instructions under which the charges have been levied shall also be supplied to the consumer for facilitating the quick disposal of cases by consumer forums if approached by the consumer.

93.2 Limitation: Under Section 56(2) of the Act, no sum due from any consumer shall be recoverable after the period of two year from the date when such sum became first due unless such sum has been shown continuously as recoverable as arrears of charges for electricity supplied.

10      Further as per their own regulations and instructions, opposite parties cannot charge any amount of previous dues or arrears without giving any supplementary bill or notice giving complete detail of charges and also giving copy of relevant instructions in which the charges have been levied. They cannot disconnect the connection of the complainant on the basis of arrears/ dues of more than 2 years and in the present case, the opposite parties have failed to produce any evidence or document which proves that they issued any supplementary bill or notice giving complete and full detail of amount shown in arrears of bills continuously sending to the complainant. Therefore, we are fully convinced with the arguments and case law produced by complainant.

          (Charanjit Singh)

    President

   (Jaswinder Kaur)

                   Member