Complainant Shingara Singh through the present complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short 'the Act') has sought for the issuance of necessary directions to the titled opposite parties (for short ‘the OP’) namely: i) the H.O. Patiala and ii) the SE, Gurdaspur, iii) the XEN, Batala and iv) the SDO Gurdaspur of the PSPC Ltd.; to rectify and replace the impugned Bills with actual consumption Bills by duly incorporating the concessions as allowed to the SC consumers besides to pay him Rs.10,000/- as cost and compensation etc. 

2.         The case of the complainant in brief is that he has been the consumer of the OP Corporation for the connected Load of 0.87 KW with A/c # G35NF 450465A and has been regularly paying the consumption Bills as drawn by the OP, in routine. And, he has been paying an average bimonthly consumption Bill of Rs.200/- to Rs.300/- approximately. Although, the installed Electric Meter has been working accurately, he has started receiving inflated Bills w e f from May’ 2014 and upon the OP’s refusal to rectify these and to grant him the concession as per the SC category, the complainant has preferred the present complaint with the desired relief as prayed, hereinabove

3.       Upon notice, the Opposite Parties appeared through their counsel and filed the joint written version taking the preliminary objections and stating therein that the impugned Bill has never been an act of negligence/deficiency in service as it simply reflected the consumption of electricity and none else. Moreover, the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and suppressing some material facts has filed the present false and frivolous complaint that deserved dismissal with costs. On merits, the OPs while rebutting and denying the allegation etc as made out in the body of the complaint, have alleged that the present complainant has never applied for the concessions as available to SC and non SC/BPL category of consumers and as such he was not entitled to the same. Lastly, the present demands through the impugned Bills being consumption-based and genuine were payable and thus the present complaint deserves dismissal with costs.

4.       Both the parties have produced/filed their respective affidavits and other related documents in evidence to support their pleadings/objections on record and the learned counsels for the litigants have duly put forth their respective arguments. We have carefully considered and perused all the available material while adjudicating the present complaint. The complainant has produced own affidavit Ex.Cw1 and other documents exhibited here as: Ex.Cw2 to Ex.Cw9 to support and prove his averments and evidence as alleged/produced in the complaint. Similarly, the OP sides have produced the affidavit Ex.OP1 of AEE/SDO Jagjit Singh duly deposing the pleadings/objections of the written reply and also the produced document exhibited as: Ex.OP2 being the copy of the Procedure for granting free Electricity to SC & non SC/BPL consumers.  OP’s other supporting evidence.

5.       We have carefully examined the produced documents to analyze the purpose and potential of each of these and discuss here the ones that effect and determine the present adjudicatory. We find that all the consumption Bills (Ex.Cw2 to Ex.Cw6) drawn upon the complainant (connected Load 0.87 KW) up to March’ 2014 were with the Meter Status as ‘N’ i.e., ‘Reading Not Noted’ and the impugned Bills Ex.Cw7 for Rs.5,170/- (units consumed 1039) with Meter status as ‘O’ (i.e., Okay) pertain to the period 11.05.2013 to 05.05.2014 (12 months) and Bill Ex.Cw8 for Rs.5,610/- (units consumed 785) with Meter status again ‘O’ pertain to 05.05.2014 to 04.07.2014 (02 months) with no satisfactory or otherwise any  explanation coming forth from the OP side. Further, the OP have pleaded that the complainant never applied for the ‘Concession’ (allowed to the SC category) in terms of Ex.OP2 and thus he was treated under ‘general category’ but have failed to produce the relevant ‘application’ to prove their assertion whereas the complainant has duly produced Ex.C9 (marked as received by the OP on 08.08.___, claimed as 2013 by complainant and not contested by the OP) and again with no further follow up action by the OP. Thus, the alleged deficiency in service on the OP’s part stand duly proved.  

6.       In the light of the all above, we partly allow the present complaint and thus ORDER the setting-aside of the impugned Bill dated 22.07.2014 for Rs.10,840/- and direct the OP service providers to draw the consumption charges by first deciding upon the complainants’ application for concessions under the SC category and allowing him the same as per his duly drawn entitlement  besides to pay him Rs.3,000/- as litigation expenses within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of these orders otherwise the complainant shall pay only the future consumption Bills from the date of the orders.  

7.           Copy of the orders be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to records.

                                   (Naveen Puri)                                                        

                                     President

ANNOUNCED:              (G.B.S.Bhullar)                (Jagdeep Kaur)

January14, 2015.                      Member.                         Member.           

*YP*