Complainant Sanjiv Kumar through the present complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, ‘the Act’) has prayed that necessary directions may kindly be issued to the opposite parties for setting aside the bill dated 07.06.2016 and 07.10.2016. He has also claimed Rs.10,000/- for the physical harassment and mental agony and Rs.10,000/- as a cost of litigation.

2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he is living in his house along with his family members and he belongs to S.C. (Balmiki) caste of Punjab and he applied for domestic electricity connection under SC category and sanctioned load of the complainant's premises was found as 0.81 K.W. It was pleaded that as per the policy of PSPCL and Punjab Govt. consumer who belongs to SC category having less than 1 K.W. Load of premises are granted some reduction in the electricity units. It was pleaded that an electricity connection bearing A/c No.G-64PT-420982F was allotted to the complainant by the opposite parties and complainant also paid Rs.255/- vide bill receipt number 62641905 to the opposite parties. It was further pleaded that the opposite parties had not issued any electricity bills to the complainant in the month of March, April, and May regarding the consumption of electricity units which was consumed by the complainant but after some months opposite parties had issued a bill dated 07.06.2016 in which they had illegally demanded Rs.8480/- but the same had not been paid by the complainant and opposite parties again issued a bill dated 07.10.2016 to the complainant in which they had demanded Rs.11,639/-. It was also pleaded that complainant had approached the opposite party No.2 and enquired the matter but the opposite party again demanded Rs.11,639/- from the complainant and he again requested them that he had applied electricity connection under SC category and as such he was not liable to pay any amount to the opposite party. It was next pleaded that the bill dated 07.10.2016 amounting to Rs.11,639/- issued by the opposite parties to complainant was illegal, null & void and not binding upon the complainant and opposite parties had also not issued any show cause notice to the complainant and had also not been heard. It was pleaded that complainant had requested the opposite party to withdraw their illegal bill amounting to Rs.11,639/- but the opposite parties did not pay any heed to the genuine request of the complainant rather threatened him that they will disconnect his electricity connection of the meter of his house illegally and forcibly. It was further pleaded that complainant had suffered a loss of Rs.10,000/- at the hands of the opposite parties, hence this complaint.

3. Notice of the complaint was served upon the opposite parties who appeared through their counsel and filed the written reply by taking the preliminary objections that complainant had filed the false and frivolous complaint; complainant had not come to the Court with clean hands and complainant is not fall under the definition of consumer. On merits, it was admitted that the account number PT-42/982 was sanctioned in the name of the complainant. It was stated that complainant got electricity connection generally and after that opposite parties had issued the bills for the month of April, June and August, 20016 on average basis but an application was moved by the complainant for getting the benefits of WSD category and as such opposite parties overhauled the account of the complainant and deducted the amount of Rs.3,976/- from SOP and Rs.517/- from E.D. and Rs.199/- from the account of the complainant and as such complainant was liable to pay Rs.5,279/- as SOP and Rs.692/- as electricity duty. It was further stated that the amount demand by the opposite parties was after the deduction of WSD category. All other averments made in the complaint have been denied and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

4. Complainant had tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C1 along with documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C8 and closed his evidence.

5. Counsel for the opposite parties had tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Arun Kumar S.D.O. Ex.OP-1, along with copy of data Ex.OP-2 and closed the evidence on behalf of opposite parties.

6. We have duly heard the learned counsels for both the sides in the back drop of the legally acceptable statutory merit of the supporting evidence/document(s) as produced by the litigating parties in order to statutorily resolve the inter-se dispute (under the C P Act’ 1986) prompting the present complaint. We find that the complainant had been the SC (Balmiki) category beneficiary holder of 0.81 KW Connection with allotted consumer A/c # G64PT420982F and the present dispute prompted upon his being in receipt of the repeatedly inflated consumption Bill dated 07.06.2016 for Rs.8,480/- (Ex.C7) followed by the impugned Bill dated 07.10.2016 for Rs.11,639/- (Ex.C8) with further threats of disconnection of his electricity connection. The complainant has further stated that the present impugned demand was issued in spite of ‘knowledge’ of the OP service providers that the complainant belongs to SC (Balmiki) category and as such has been entitled to all the benefits bestowed upon by the State Govt. upon to his class category of consumers but the OP Corporation had been adamant not to rectify the impugned Bill and hence the present complaint.

7. We further find that the OP Corporation in its written reply and in its Affidavit Ex.OP1 has deposed that the complainant had got the electricity connection under the general category of consumers and thus was issued the impugned Bill comprised of the amount of Rs.11,639/- and that was further downwardly amended upon an application by the complainant to avail of the WSD (weaker section) benefits and the impugned Bill was issued on ‘average’ consumption basis. We find that the OP corporation has not put forth any good logic/reason for having issued the Bill on ‘average’ basis and that also after having raised ‘No Bill’ for more than ‘6’ months. We are certainly not convinced with the clarification as put forth by the OP Corporation to justify its act of having issued the impugned Bill that we are hereby pleased to set-aside. Moreover, the impugned demand as put forth upon the complainant for payment of his consumption Bills for the freshly issued connection on average basis by the opposite party corporation has been admittedly not a matter of routine and the same has not even been proved to be in accordance with the legally accrued amounts as per its Sales/Distribution Policy and the Rules & Regulations etc as framed there under.

8. In the light of the all above, we partly allow the present complaint and thus ORDER the opposite party corporation to withdraw the impugned Bill (Ex.C8) and instead raise the applicable consumption charges on the basis of complainant’s consumer class-category as herein declared by him i.e., S.C. (Balmiki) and others etc and the complainant shall be liable to pay the same along with completion of all requisite formalities for availing of the entitled benefits. The parties shall bear their own litigation expenses, here.

9. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After

compliance, file be consigned to records.

(Naveen Puri)

                                                                                   President.

ANNOUNCED:                                                  (Jagdeep Kaur)

FEB. 07, 2017                                                                Member.

*YP*