BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, GURDASPUR.
Complaint No: 195 of 2021.
Date of Institution:25.08.2021.
Date of order:01.09.2023.
Surjit Kaur Widow of Harbalwinder Singh resident of Village Pirdi Sain, P.O Babri Nangal, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur.
.....Complainant.
VERSUS
- Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. Sub Division Tibber through its SDO. Pincode-143529.
- Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. through its Supervisor Engineer, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur. Pincode-143521.
- Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. through its Executive Engineer, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur. Pincode -143521.
- Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. through its CMD, The Mall Patiala. Pincode -147001
.....Opposite parties.
Complaint U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Present: For the Complainant: Sh.Harmeet Singh Bathanwala, Adv.
For the Opposite Parties: Sh.SuvirMahajan, Adv.
Quorum: Sh.Lalit Mohan Dogra, President, Sh.Bhagwan Singh
Matharu, Member.
ORDER
Bhagwan Singh Matharu, Member.
Surjit Kaur, Complainant (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') against the PSPCL (here-in-after referred to as 'opposite parties).
2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that she had installed electricity meter connection bearing No.G47TV26-1282L and husband of the complainant had died and after his death, she was paying regular bills of above said connection and she is not defaulter of PSPCL, even nothing is due against her. The said electricity connection was used by complainant and her labours who are working in the fields of the complainant. This connection has been installed by the opposite parties since more than 20 years. It was alleged that on 04.07.2021, the above said electricity connection was disconnected by official of PSPCL without any reason. It was mentioned by the complainant that this meter connection was used by the family of her labour which involves one to two families and their child and their lives have become hell in the summer season without light. It was further alleged that the above said disconnection of electricity meter as illegal and without any reason. After that she made repeated requests to the opposite parties orally, in writing as well as through telephone to restore the electricity meter connection of her but the opposite parties did not pay any heed to her. It was also alleged that the opposite parties had also disconnected the electricity meter connections of the complainant's son illegally, arbitrary without any reason. Due to this illegal act and conduct of the opposite parties the complainant has suffered great loss and also suffered mental and physical harassment and inconvenience. So, there is a clear cut deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties and prayed that necessary directions may be issued to the opposite parties to restore the above mentioned electricity connections and the opposite parties may also be directed to pay of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of mental torture and physical harassment suffered by complainant from the hands of the opposite parties, in the interest of justice.
3. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing their written reply, the opposite parties raised preliminary objections that the son of the complainant namely Maninder Singh has filed two identical complaints on the same subject matter, one before this Hon'ble Commission and the other is pending before Permanent Lok Adalat and this complaint has been filed just to harass the opposite parties and hence deserves to be dismissed. It has been further pleaded that 25 KV transformer is already installed in the premises of complainant and from that point the supply of electricity can be restored but the complainant does not permit opposite parties to do so and hence complainant cannot take benefit of her own wrongs. The complainant has concealed material facts and has filed the present false and frivolous complaint which deserves to be dismissed with special costs. It is pleaded that no electricity connection was disconnected by official of opposite parties on 04.07.2021 but on dated 13.07.2021, the 11 KV Sujanpur Feeder became un-operational. Thereafter lineman Sh.Sukhdev Singh went at the site and he observed that power supply from 220 KV Sub Station Tibber to 11 KV Sujanpur Feeder was off but yet the current was passing through line. It is further pleaded that when lineman inquired the matter, he found that PVC wire of electric meter of complainant was touching 11 KV feeder line and hence the house of one Tarlochan Singh was having double supply of electricity. The above said lineman cut off PVC wire and restored supply of 11 KV Sujanpur Feeder. Due to late night hours, the supply of complainant could not be restored on the same night. It was further pleaded that on the next day when the employees of opposite parties went to the site to connect PVC to restore supply to complainant, the above said Tarlochan Singh did not permit to restore the supply of electricity as transformer was near to the house of Tarlochan Singh from where the supply was to be provided. It was further pleaded that Tarlochan Singh was threatening to commit suicide if the supply is restored from the above said transformer. The matter was also reported to SHO PS Dhariwal vide Memo No.826 dated 27.07.2021 against Tarlochan Singh that he did not permit to restore electricity. It was further pleaded that Letter No.1028 dated 01.09.2021 was also written to Deputy Commissioner, Gurdaspur for police protection. It has pertinently been mentioned by the opposite parties that a 25 KV Transformer is already installed in the premises of complainant and from that point the supply of electricity can be restored, but complainant also does not permit to do so and hence complainant cannot take benefits of his own wrongs. It was further pleaded that if supply is restored from transformer near Tarlochan Singh, it will amount to two feeder supplies which may cause accident in future and in that event complainant will be responsible for that.
On merits, the opposite parties have reiterated their stand as taken in legal objections and denied all the averments of the complaint and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. In the end, the opposite parties prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of Surjit Kaur, (Complainant) as Ex.C-1/A along with other documents as Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-2.
5. Learned counsel for the opposite parties has tendered into evidence affidavit of Dilbagh Singh, (S.D.O, P.S.P.C.L, Sub- Division Tibber, Gurdaspur) as Ex.OPW-1/A along with reply.
6. Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.
7. Written arguments not filed by both the parties.
8. As enumerated above the present complaint was filed by the complainant due to disconnection of her electricity connections by the opposite parties without any reason as alleged by the complainant. It was alleged by the complainant that she was having electricity connection bearing A/c No.GT47TV261282L which is being used by her labour, but on 04.07.2021 officials of the opposite party No.1 had disconnected the connection without any reason. It was also pointed out that he has never been defaulter of the opposite parties. But this connection has not been restored inspite of repeated requests.
9. Opposite parties in their reply denied all the allegations and stated that PVC wire supplying electricity to this electric connection of the complainant was disconnected due to some technical reasons and not due to any fault on the part of the complainant. It is further stated that on 13.07.2021 one 11 KV Sujanpur Feeder became faulty and during the checking of line, it was noticed by the employees of the opposite party No.1 that PVC wire feeding above connection was touching with the 11 KV Feeder line and they have to cut off that PVC wire temporarily to make the 11 KV Feeder operational as it may cause accident also. But later on when their employees went there to reconnect the PVC wire in proper way, a third person namely Tarlochan Singh caused dispute and resisted to connect the PVC at the previous place. It has further been stated by the opposite parties that when the officials of the opposite party No.1 tried to connect the PVC wire with another 25 KV transformer installed nearby to the premises of the complainant to restore the power supply then the complainant herself did not allow to connect the same. After that opposite party No.1 lodged the FIR against the said third person and reported the matter to the administration also to interfere and to resolve the issue.
10. Hence, we find that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties but the power supply could not restored due to the personal dispute of complainant with the third person and unwanted ego of the complainant and that third person.
11. It has also been stated by the opposite parties and argued by their counsel that technically the supply should be restored by connecting said PVC wire to 25 KVA transformer installed in the premises of the complainant to give proper power supply to the meters in the question. Moreover the problem of double supply will also be solved in this way.
12. From the above facts of the case we see that the problem of restoration of the power supply to the meters in question could not be resolved by opposite parties due to unnecessary and unwanted interference of the complainant and a third person in the working of the employees of the PSPCL for their vested interests.
13. We do understand that neither the complainant nor any other third person have any right to interfere and dictate the terms for point of power supply to the distribution licencee but it is the prerogative of the distribution licencee (opposite parties in this case) to decide the point of power supply to give proper uninterrupted power supply to their consumers on technical basis as per rules and regulations of their department.
14. During the course of the arguments by the counsels by both the parties it has also came out that if the PVC wire was connected at the previous place then there happens to be double supply at that point, which could have been dangerous and accidental also. Hence we are also of the opinion that the power supply should only be restored from the technically suitable point which may not be accidental and avoid double supply.
15. In view of the aforesaid discussion considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the present complaint is partly allowed and opposite party no.1 is hereby directed to restore the power supply to the above said electric connection from the nearby 25 KVA transformer installed in the premises of the complainant as it will solve the problem of double supply also, within 30 days from the receipt of the copy of the orders. Further, complainant is also directed not to interfere or raise any dispute with opposite parties at the time of restoration of the power supply.
No order as to costs.
16. The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency.
17. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. File be consigned.
(Lalit Mohan Dogra)
President
Announced: (B.S.Matharu)
Sept. 01, 2023 Member
YP.
