Complainant Santa Singh has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (for short, C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to the opposite parties to restrain from making any recovery of Rs.67,580/- and disconnection his meter bearing No.3000127380. Opposite parties be further directed to restore the electric connection bearing No.3000127540. Opposite parties be next directed to pay Rs.20,000/- on account of mental agony and harassment alongwith Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that his wife namely Harjinder Kaur is owner in possession of residential house situated at Civil Line, BSF Area, Gurdaspur. Some portion of said house was rented to Amrik Singh son of Bawa Singh, so the electric connection bearing No.30000127540 was got installed at his name. So that tenant Amrik Singh was bound to make the payment against electricity consumption. Amrik Singh was regularly paying charges to opposite parties. Amrik Singh remained as tenant upto December, 2016 and then shifted to some other place due to his transfer, orally informing him on phone. In the month of February, 2017, he received a false bill dated 23.02.2017 with wrongful demand of Rs.67,580/-. He was shocked to see the bill, the said connection has got changed into Non-residential/Commercial in place of domestic. He immediately rushed to office of opposite parties and requested that his tenant Amrik Singh was using the connection in his residential portion and he is regularly paying charges but he was informed that Amrik Singh have not made payment of charges. Infact the opposite parties made checking and thereafter connection was changed into non-residential and this fact was in knowledge of Amrik Singh but due to non-payment by Amrik Singh, the meter was disconnected on 25.02.2016 and he has paid bill upto 28.05.2016.  He has next pleaded that he moved application to opposite parties to correct the bill and charge the amount as residential/domestic connection instead of charging  as commercial but they did not pay any heed and remain adamant to recover the amount on said bill or disconnect the other meter.  Hence this complaint.

3.           Notice issued to the opposite parties who appeared through their counsel and filed the written reply submitting therein that the P.S.P.C.L. released electric connection in the name of Amrik Singh tenant and the Amrik Singh used this connection for the office of Manager Punjab State Warehouse Corporation. It was found after the checking by the P.S.P.C.L. on 9.05.2015 that the connection is used for commercial purpose, so the bill was to be recovered against this connection account no.3000127540(MF431255) as commercial rate. The bill issued in the name of Amrik Singh was consumption of electricity. Since Amrik Singh was tenant of the complainant's wife, where the electricity meter also installed in the name of complainant husband of the Harjinder Kaur owner of the building. Since Amrik Singh has not paid the consumption amount to the P.S.P.C.L. and has vacated the building without knowledge of the P.S.P.C.L. Hence complainant being the husband of the Harjinder Kaur owner of the building is bound to make the payment to the P.S.P.C.L. All other averments made in the complaint have been denied and lastly the complaint has been prayed to be dismissed with cost.

4.       Complainant has tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C-1, alongwith other documents Ex.C-2 and Ex.C-3 and closed the evidence.

5.    Ld.counsel for the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Pritpal Singh, S.D.O. PSPCL Ex.OP-1/A alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-13 and closed the evidence.

6.    Written arguments have been filed by both the parties.

7.       We have carefully gone through the pleadings of counsels for the parties; arguments advanced by their respective counsels and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsels for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.

8.     As enumerated above, the complainant in the present complaint challenged the illegal demand of Rs.67,580/- raised through electricity bill dated 23.2.2017 by opposite party no.3 against electric connection No.30000 127540, which is placed at Ex.C-3. Further he has alleged that the category of the said connection was also changed from domestic to non-residential/commercial and this connection stand disconnected from 25.2.2016.

9.     Opposite party in their written statement stated that the said connection was checked by the official of their department dated 20.5.2015 and checking report is placed at Ex.OP-1. It has been further pleaded that action for charging of said amount and change of category was taken on the basis of this checking report wherein it was reported that tenant of the complainant Mr. Amrik  Singh used this connection for office of Manager Punjab State Ware House Corporation.

10.     During the proceeding of the case, the complainant and his ld.counsel specified that it was other connection in the name of  complainant Santa Singh with account No.3000127380 which was used as office of  Punjab State Ware House Corporation by their tenant Amrik Singh. It was also checked by official of opposite party on 29.5.2015 and its category was also changed to non-residential and they have deposited the entire requisite amount raised against this very connection. But the electric connection in question was used as residential purpose only.

11.     It was further pleaded that they have not received any notice in this regard regarding charging of amount and change of category but they come to know through the disputed bill dated 23.2.2017.

12.    Opposite party has placed on record at Ex.OP-2 the copy of checking report of other connection in the name of Santa Singh which is signed by AE/AEE alongwith other officials. Opposite party has not produced copy of the notice issued to the complainant or to the tenant regarding charging of Rs.67,580/- in the said connection in dispute. The checking report dated 20.5.2015 of this connection in dispute which is placed at Ex.OP-1 is signed by M.I. (Meter inspector) only and it was not signed by any other person of the rank of officer of the opposite parties.

13.    From the above detailed facts of the case, we find that there is sheer violation of regulations specified in the Electricity Supply Code-2014.

          a) Primarily as per Annexure-II (i) (A) (i) of this Supply code the authorized officer for checking of DS Connection  is "Any             officer   of Distribution wing not below the rank           of      AE (within his jurisdiction)."

In the present case the checking report dated 20.5.2015 was signed by M.I. who is below the rank of the AE. Hence this checking report (Ex.OP-1) cannot be considered as valid.

        b) If it is the case of change of category from domestic to        commercial then as per Supply Code Chapter VIII      regulation   36 (d) it was to be covered under unauthorized   of electricity (UUE). Then action was required to be         taken as per regulation 36.1. So notice under Section 126          of Electricity Act was    required to be issued.

In the present case opposite party has not put on record any evidence regarding dealing this case as per this regulation of Supply Code.

Hence action taken to charge the amount in the electricity bill on the basis of change of category becomes null and void.

          c) Otherwise also as per regulation 30.1.2 of Supply code     prior notice is required to be issued for charging of arrears       etc.But opposite party failed to put on record such notice           other than the letter issued for recovery of this disputed        amount to the complainant and others.

14.      In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the checking report dated 20.5.2015 (Ex.OP-1) on the basis of which the disputed amount was charged in the disputed bill dated 23.2.2017 is not valid at all. Further opposite parties has not followed the instructions /guidelines as per Electricity Supply Code-2014 in the present case. So it is considered to be deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Hence the amount of Rs.67,580/- charged in the disputed electricity bill dated 23.2.2017 and change of category is totally unjustified.

15.     Opposite party has failed to prove their action by way of cogent evidences as per rules and regulations of the department. Therefore, the present complaint is partly allowed and the amount of Rs.67,580/- charged in the  disputed electricity bill dated 23.7.2017 is hereby set aside as the checking report dated 20.5.2015 is considered as invalid. Further opposite party no.3 is directed to restore the said electric connection of Account No.3000127540 in the previous category. Besides this opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5000/- lumpsum as cost of litigation and compensation for harassment to the complainant.

16.      Any other application pending in this case stand disposed off accordingly.

17.     The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.

18.     Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. File be consigned to record room.                                                                                                               

               (Kiranjit Kaur Arora)

                                                                            President   

Announced:                                                 (B.S.Matharu)

March 17, 2023                                                  Member

*MK*