Complainant Sarwan Singh through the present complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, ‘the Act’) has sought issuance of necessary directions to the titled opposite parties to withdraw the impugned demand of Rs.64,560/- raised vide bill dated 29.10.2014 and to issue correct bill as per his consumption. Opposite parties be also directed to pay compensation alongwith litigation expenses to him.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he has installed a Temporary Electric Connection bearing Account No.3000316445 for raising construction of House at Urban Estate Gurdaspur and the said connection was got released by the opposite parties on 23.5.2013. He is hiring the services of the opposite parties, thus he is consumer of the opposite parties. He has further pleaded that at the time of taking electric connection, it was told by the opposite parties that there is provision of monthly bill in the temporary electric connection which would be paid by him on receiving the bill on every month which would be fixed at the rate of Rs.981/-. But on the contrary, he has not received bill being issued by the opposite parties, resultantly he visited the office of the opposite party no.2 and demanded bill and on his persistent request, the opposite parties have prepared bill, which he had deposited with the opposite party amounting to Rs.2660/- vide receipt dated 3.9.2013. Thereafter the opposite parties again failed to provide satisfactory services to the opposite parties as they have failed to issue any bill to him. He approached the opposite party no.2 number of times who used to send him towards the opposite party no.4 and they used to harass and victimize him intentionally, willfully and deliberately. He has next pleaded that opposite party no.4 has verbally told him that there is outstanding amount of Rs.30,268/- against him. Actually, the said demand was illegal, null and void and accordingly he moved application to the opposite party no.2 and asked for rectification of the bill. But on the contrary opposite party no.2 handed over bill dated 29.10.2014 for Rs.64,560/- which is also illegal, null and void, against the rules and instructions of the PSPCL. On the said application moved by him, the Lineman has made report that the meter is in working condition and its Display is not properly seen. More so, a new fact also comes into the knowledge that the opposite parties have replaced the earlier meter. In fact at no point of time, he was informed regarding replacement of his electric meter. This entire incident has happened at the behest of opposite party no.4, which was out and out to cause irreparable loss to him, as he has refused to oblige the opposite party no.4 who was demanding bribe from him to settle the matter. The demand of the opposite parties is totally illegal, null and void, as in the impugned bill, consumption was shown to be 11321 units and even he has always ready and is still ready to make the payment of consumption charges. So there is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.
3. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared through their counsel and filed the written reply taking the preliminary objections that the complaint of the complainant is not maintainable. On merits, it was submitted that due to certain drawbacks in the S A P system launched with effect from 1.4.2012, for issuing the bills, the bills are not being issued regularly. The bills were being issued as per the criteria and rules laid down by the Power Corporation. Five bills have been issued to the complainant since the day of release of connection. The corporation or its employees do not have any enmity with the complainant. On the contrary, he being from the Police has been throwing his weight around and giving sort of threats. It is accepted that Rs.2660/- has been deposited by the complainant. It has been further submitted that the bills have been issued to the complainant on 18.12.2013, for Rs.6440/- and the status of the meter was D. The next bill was issued on 19.3.2014 for Rs.28,600/-. This bill was prepared on average basis as the meter was defective. On 1.7.2014 again the bill was issued for Rs.45,940/- and the last bill was issued on 29.10.2014 and this bill was for Rs.64,560/-. Since the meter was found to be defective, bill dated 8.12.2013, 19.3.2014 and 29.10.2014 have been found on average basis. The complainant did not pay any bill after paying Rs.2660/- for bill dated 20.8.2013. Therefore, amount of all the bills have been added in the bill dated 29.10.2014 and also includes surcharge for the unpaid bills. The allegations that opposite party no.4 used to harass the complainant intentionally, willfully and deliberately are absolutely wrong and baseless. It has been next submitted that in a short span of 9 months three meters have been changed after being found defective. It gives a suspicion that meters were tampered. That meters have been changed with the knowledge of the complainant. It has been further submitted that the allegations regarding opposite party no.4 demanding bribe from the complainant ware absolutely wrong. All other averments made in the complaint have been denied and lastly the complaint has been prayed to be dismissed with costs.
- Counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C1, along with other documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C5 and closed the evidence.
- Sh.Amardeep Nagra S.D.O. of the opposite parties has tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP-1 along with other document Ex.OP-2 to Ex.OP9 and closed the evidence.
6. We have duly considered the pleadings of both the parties; heard the arguments advanced by their counsels and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsels for the purpose of adjudication of the present complaint.
7. From the pleadings and evidence on record we observe that the temporary Electric connection No.3000316445 was installed on 23.05.2013 and admittedly the Consumption Bill as drawn on 18.12.2013 for Rs.6,440/- was with the Meter status as ‘D’ i.e., defective. Further, the Ex.OP1 affidavit produced by the OP (of the SDO Amandeep Singh) duly deposes that on account of certain drawbacks in the S.A.P. system (launched on 01.04.2012) the Bills could not be drawn on regular basis and the Bills dated 08.12.2013, 19.03.2014 & 29.10.2014 (pertaining to the present complaint) were drawn on ‘average’ basis since the Meter was ‘defective’. It is not understood as to how the ‘average’ basis could be reached in a ‘freshly’ opened account (with no record/ history of past consumption) and that too with an admitted defective ‘Meter’ right from its day ‘one’. We find the deposition Ex.OP1 as totally ‘incoherent’ measured against the ‘simplicity’ of the matter in issue. Even, the ‘sanctioned’ connected load at its optimum level could not have consumed the ‘billed’ consumption and instead of holding an ‘investigation’ into the matter to know the ‘truth’, the OP service providers levied ‘additional’ surcharge to further ‘burden’ the voluminous Bills. We find the presently drawn consumption Bills to be arbitrary ‘acts’ that have badly bruised the consumer rights of the complainant and thus attract the protecting provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
8. In the light of the all above, we dispose of the present complaint by directing the OP service providers to withdraw the impugned consumption Bills and instead draw upon the complainant the actual consumption Bills (as per the ‘alternate’ formula basis without any surcharge etc) within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of these orders. The complainant (like other consumers) shall be liable to pay all his consumption Bills with effect from August’2014, onwards; if not already paid.
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)
July 20, 2015 Member.
*MK*
