Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Room No. 208 2nd Floor, District Administrative Complex, Tarn Taran
Consumer Complaint No : 56 of 2019
Date of Institution : 09.08.2019
Date of Decision : 23.06.2021
Rajinder Kumar son of Chaman Lal resident of Pathkan Mohalla, Patti, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran.
......Complainant
Versus
- Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited through its Sub Divisional Officer, Sub Division City Patti, Division Patti, District Tarn Taran.
- Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited, having Registered office at PSEB Head office, the Mall, Patiala through its Chairman/ authorized officer.
.....Opposite Parties.
Complaint Under Section 11, 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Quorum: Sh. Charanjit Singh, President
Sh. Jatinder Singh Pannu, Member
For Complainant Sh. M.P. Arora Advocate
For Opposite Parties Sh. A.K. Sharma Advocate
ORDERS:
Charanjit Singh, President;
1 The complainant Rajinder Kumar has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties on the allegations that he is residing at Pathkan Mohalla Patti, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran and is utilizing the electricity provided by the PSPCL in his house through electricity connection bearing No. JM32/1479 (Account No. 3000284227) as such, the complainant is using the electricity provided by the PSPCL. The complainant is consuming the electricity and further regularly paying the bills of consumed electricity. As such, the complainant is consumer of the opposite parties for last several years and the complainant uses to pay his bills within the stipulated time. On 4th July, 2015, the electric meter of the complainant of the above said connection shows some inaccuracy and was got marked as ‘S’ code by the corporation and further on 5th July, 2015 a new meter bearing serial No. 8406342 was got installed in the place of old meter by the corporation. Thereafter, the electric meter bearing serial No. 8406342 of the complainant of the above said connection also stopped working properly and as such, the meter was got marked as ‘D’ Code on 12th Feb, 2017 by the corporation and the complainant has made so many requests for change of the meter. Thereafter, on 10.5.2018 the said electricity meter bearing serial No. 8406342 of the complainant was again got changed with a new meter by the corporation and on 10.5.2018, when the meter was removed the reading of the meter was got recorded 4194 at that time. It was the deficiency in services on the part of the corporation to change the meter after 15 months after it was got marked as ‘D’ Code. Afterwards, the corporation has sent the meter bearing serial No. 8406342 for checking purpose at its instance, as such, the said meter was got checked from ME Lab through Challan No. 479 dated 4.7.2018 by the corporation and no tempering etc. was found in the checking of the meter and no extra thing was found in the meter, however, the meter was not working properly and was ‘D’ coded by the corporation in the month of Feb, 2017 as such, the accounts of the complainant was overhauled by the corporation. Thereafter, the corporation had sent a correspondence bearing No. 1518 dated 10.8.2018 to the complainant and has demanded the calculated electricity charges of Rs.1,19,193/- in an arbitrary manner. The above said exaggerated amount of Rs. 1,19,193/- was imposed upon the complainant in an arbitrary manner and against the rules and regulations. The above said amount was imposed on the basis of average 1135 units bi-monthly for the period from 5.7.2015 (date of installation of the meter) to 11.5.2018 (date of removal of meter) i.e. for approximately 34/35 months, which comes to total 19291 units and the amount was imposed for 15097 units after deducting the 4194 units for which the bills were charged earlier i.e. (19291-4194=15097). The above said average basis units of 1135 bi-monthly for the period from 5.7.2015 (date of installation of the meter) to 11.5.2018 (date of removal of meter) i.e. for approximately 34/35 months were recorded by the officials of the corporation wrongly and against the rules and regulations as such, the complainant has requested to the officials of the corporation to review the calculation of electricity charges of his electricity connection as the amount was imposed upon him without any basis but none was ready to hear the genuine requests made by the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant has moved an application to the concerned official of the corporation for referring the above said meter to the dispute settlement committee (DSC) and thereafter, it was intimated to the complainant by the officials that if he wants to matter to be heard by the DSC then he has to deposit the 20% of the above said amount with the corporation. As such, the complainant has deposited the 20% amount i.e. Rs. 23,839/- on dated 15.2.2019 vide receipt bearing No. 219500244750 and later on the above said matter was referred to the Dispute Settlement Committee. The DSC has not properly settled the grievance of the complainant with regard to exaggerated electricity charges as imposed by the corporation with regard to the electricity connection and has acted against the rules and regulations of the corporation. There are well settled rules and regulations as prescribed by the Punjab State Regulatory Commission and it is one rule among the above said rules that after testing the meter from the M.E. Lab, the electricity charges will be computed in accordance with the test results for a period of 6 months immediately preceding the date of test or date of removal of defective meter where such testing is at the instance of the licensee or date of receipt of request from consumer for testing. In the present case, the meter was got checked by the corporation after marking it ‘D’ Code at its instance. In no case, the corporation can charge/ calculate electricity charges beyond six months after testing of the meter. As such, it becomes crystal clear from the above stated facts that the corporation has sent a wrong, arbitrary and biased notice with the demand of Rs. 36,050/- as calculated electricity charges for the said period including charges, fine etc. and on the other hand, the corporation is only entitled to charge the electric charges only for preceding six months from the above said dates. The above said electricity meter was got D-coded on 12.2.2017 but the average basis of unit was calculated for the period from 5.7.2015 (date of installation of the meter) to 11.5.2018 (date of removal of meter) i.e. for approximately 34/35 months, which is also another deficiency in services in itself. The DSC has taken average units 607 bi-monthly which is also not as per the rules and regulations of the corporation. The complainant has intimated the matter to concerned authorities of the PSPCL and has requested so many times to the concerned officials to inquire the matter but he used to linger on the matter on one and other pretext. The complainant used to go regularly to office of PSPCL but all in vain. The complainant has suffered a lot due to fault of meter, but very astonishingly that insptie of the clear fault of the corporation, no official of the corporation was ready to hear the request of the complainant with regard to correction of the excessive and unjust amount of electricity charges. The complainant has requested to official of opposite parties so many times to revise amount of electricity charges as per rules and regulations but all in vain. The complainant has suffered a lot due to fault of the meter but very astonishingly that in dispute of clear fault of corporation, no official of the corporation was ready to hear the request of the complainant with regard to correction of the excessive and unjust amount of electricity charges. The complainant has requested the officials for so many times to revise amount of electricity charges as per rules and regulations but all in vain. Due to excessive and unjust calculation electricity charges of the unused electricity, the complainant has mentally harassed and further the complainant has suffered physically and mentally due to act and conduct on behalf of the officials of opposite parties. The act on the part of the corporation and its officials is arbitrary act and highly unfair trade practice as the complainant is suffering without any fault of him. The complainant has prayed that opposite parties may be directed to set aside the excessive and exaggerated amount of electricity charges of Rs.36,050/- and correct the amount of electricity charges of the account of the complainant as per rules and regulations in the interest of justice. The complainant has also prayed Rs. 20,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation expenses. Alongwith the complaint, the complainant has placed on record his affidavit Ex. C-1, Self attested copy of meter reading Ex. C-2, Self attested copy of electricity Bill Ex. C-3, Self attested copy of correspondence dated 25.3.2019 Ex. C-4, Self attested copy of application Ex. C-5, Self attested copy of report of DSC Ex. C-6, Self attested copy of correspondence dated 30.7.209 Ex. C-7, Self attested copy of Bill Ex. C-8, Self attested copy of Adhar Card Ex. C-9.
2 After formal admission of the complaint, notice was issued to Opposite Parties and opposite parties appeared through counsel and filed written version contesting the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable as the MD. Of Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited has not arrayed as party. The entire work of PSPCL is carried out in the name of M.D. The amount of Rs. 1,19,393/- stated in complaint is bill of reading which has been consumed by the complainant and qua this the complainant has filed representation before the Disputes Settlement Committee of Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited but some relief was granted by the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited to the complainant but inspute of that relief, the complainant has moved this complaint by concealing this fact. The complainant is a wrong doer and this Commission cannot give help to a person who is already a wrong doer. On merits, it was pleaded that the complainant is using the electricity provided by the PSPCL in his house through connection in question. The demand is legal and genuine one. The amount of Rs. 1,19,393/- stated in complaint is bill of reading which has been consumed by the complainant. There is no any fault on the part of the opposite parties. There is no unfair trade practice on the part of 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 parties have placed on record affidavit of SDO Ex. OP/A alongwith documents Ex. OPs/1 to Ex. OPs/10 and closed the evidence.
3 The complainant has filed rejoinder to the written version filed by the opposite parties and reiterated the stand as taken in the complaint.
4 We have heard the Ld. counsels for the parties and have carefully gone through the record.
5 Ld. counsel for the complainant contended that the complainant is having an electric connection bearing Account NoJM32/1432 (Account No. 3000284227) under DS category and regularly paying electricity bills issued by the opposite parties. He further contended that the opposite parties have demanded Rs.1,19,193/- from the complainant on average basis for the period from the month July 2015 to May 2018 for 15097 units. Later on the complainant has also deposited Rs. 23,839/- out of Rs. 1,19,193/- which is clear from the statement of account Ex. R-10. Later on, the complainant approached the Chief Engineer, Border Amritsar for settlement of claim vide Ex. C-5 and later-on Disputes Settlement Committee has held in its order Ex. C-6 that order for charging the amount on the basis of 15097 units is wrong and the Disputes Settlement Committee has ordered to charge the amount from the complainant for the period from July 2015 to May 2018 on average basis by calculating 607 units per Bi monthly. He also contended that after that a Memo No. 1519 dated 30.7.2019 Ex. C-7 was issued to the complainant for demanding Rs. 36050/- for the period 7/15 to 5/18. He further contended that the meter of the complainant was sent to ME Lab and in the ME Lab it was found that the meter of the complainant was not tempered. On the other hands, Ld. counsel for the opposite parties contended that the amount of Rs. 1,19,393/- stated in complaint is bill of reading which has been consumed by the complainant and qua this the complainant has filed representation before the Disputes Settlement Committee of Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited but some relief was granted by the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited to the complainant but inspite of that relief, the complainant has moved this complaint by concealing this fact. Ld. counsel for the opposite parties has placed on record documents Ex. R-1 to R-10. Ld. counsel for the opposite parties contended that the amount demanded by the opposite parties is bill of reading which has been consumed by the complainant and the complainant is liable for the same.
6 We have heard the contentions raised by Ld. counsels for the parties. Previously the opposite parties were demanding Rs. 1,19,393/- from the complainant on average basis for the period from July 2015 to May 2018 and later on the opposite parties started demanding Rs. 36,050/- for the period from July 2015 to May 2018. From document Ex. R-9, it shows that the meter of the complainant was giving ‘D’ code from 12.2.2017 to 10.5.2018 but the opposite parties have changed the meter after about 15 months and the opposite parties have taken long time for changing the meter of complainant and for removing the D Code. The opposite parties are claiming the bill from the complainant for the period from 7/2015 to 9/2018 i.e. for 35 months and the opposite parties are claiming the disputed amount from the complainant on average basis. As per 'Electricity Supply Code' and 'Related Matters Regulations 2007', wherein Clause 21.5.2 itself gave a direction to the employee of the Punjab State Corporation that “in case of dead or stop meter the accounts of the consumer shall be overhauled for the period meter remained defective/dead stop, subject to maximum period of six months”, but in this case, the OP has been charged on the basis of average bill for more than six months, which is again against the regulations 2007 and in support of this observation, we like to made reliance upon a pronouncement of our Hon'ble State Commission, cited in 2003(1) C. P. C. 310, titled as “Shingara Singh Vs. Punjab State Electricity Board and Another”, wherein his Lordship held as under:-
“ Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Sections 15 & 12, Electricity bill, amount of electricity bill was demanded from 1997 to 1999 on average basis, It is now settled law that maximum period for which bill can be raised in respect of a defective meter under Electricity Act is 6 months and no more, Order of District Forum quashed, Case remanded for fresh decision keeping into view above mentioned observations.”
7 From the above detailed discussion, it has emerged that there is a deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and as such, we find that the complainant is entitled for the relief and accordingly, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and memo No. 1519 dated 30.7.2019 Ex. C-6 issued by the opposite parties for the period July 2015 to May 2018 is hereby set-aside and opposite parties are directed to not recover any amount from the complainant for the aforesaid period. The amount of Rs. 23,839/- which has been received by the opposite parties which is clear from statement of account Ex. R-10 either return to the complainant or to adjust in the further bills. Complainant is also entitled to Rs.4,000/- (Rs.Four Thousand only) as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony and Rs 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) as litigation expenses. Opposite Parties are directed to comply with the order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which the complainant is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum, on the awarded amount, from the date of complaint till its realisation. Copy of order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the Open Commission
On 23.6.2021
