Present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date has been filed by complainant Charanjit sharma against opposite parties i.e. PSEB through its Chairman, The Mall, Patiala and other functionaries seeking quashment of impunged memo dated 20/8/2007 for recovery of amount of Rs.9322/- for committing alleged energy pilferage being illegal, null and void and contrary to the provisions of Sales Regulations and Electricity Act, 2003 and also for monetary compensation on account of deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.<br /> 2. Gist of the complaint is that complainant has been serving as Assistant Lineman at P.S.E.B. Sub Division No.2, Sultanpur Lodhi and he is circule Vice President of Kapurthala Employees Federation, Punjab State electricity Board. He is also consumer of the opposite parties having domestic electric connection bearing A/c No.GC-44/0423 installed at his residential house situated at Mohalla New Bebe Nanki Nagar, Lohian Road, Near Harkrishan Public School,, Sultanpur Lodhi, Kapurthala and has been paying electricity bills regularly to the opposite parties.. It is alleged that senior functionaries of the Board felt enraged with him on account of protest rally arranged by him as a vice President of Employees Union against misbehaviour of S.E. T.S.Thind towards the employees. It is further alleged that on 19/8/2007 officials of the PSEB came to his house and carried with them wires and managed show of making false case of pilferage of electricity against him to harass him as a vindictive measure and there was also quarrel between complainant and officials of the Board. Later on he received memo No.7254 dated dated 20/8/07 from SDO Sub Division No.1 Sultanpur Lodhi levelling false allegation of theft of energy and imposed penalty of Rs.9322/- which is illegal and unjustifiable as he never indulged in theft of energy. Sh. Sukhdev Singh sahota J.E. Sub Division No.1 Sultanpur Lodhi also disconnected his electric connection on 20/8/2007. He had to deposit the said amount of penalty under pressure for restoration of electric connection which he was not otherwise liable to pay on account of false allegation of pilferage of energy.<br /> 3. Opposite parties appeared and controverted the allegations of the complainant and resisted his claim. Opposite party Board has defended legality and validity pnalty amount of Rs.9322/- vide impunged memo dated 20/8/07 on account of pilferage of electric energy. It is pleaded that on 19/8/07 at about 1.50 PM, a cheking party headed by Sh.D.K. Sharda Senior XEN Grid Maintenance Kapurthala alongwith Malkit Singh Thind SDO, Sub Division No.1 PSEB, Kapurthala alongwith Sukhdev Singh Sahota JE and others checked the connection of the consumer and found that consumer removed the neutral and phase grips from the main board and consumer joined PVC wire of eight to nine meter of length with the joint in the supply line going in the street and adjoining the house of the complainant and other end of said PVC wire was found connected with a plug through the roof of the house. The meter of the complainant was found stopped at the time of checking and and the electricity supply was going on . The checking party took the wire of PVC into their possession through which the complainant was committing theft of energy. Apart from theft of energy the complainant was found using 4.006 KW as unauthorized load over and above than sanctioned load of 2.41 KW. The checking report wa prepared at the spot and same was also signed by Kamlesh Rani wife of the complainant and she received the copy of checking report. The allegations of vindictiveness and resultant false case of pilferage of electricity have been stoutly denied. Therefore, opposite parties have justified penalty amount of Rs.9322/- vide memo dated 20/8/07 for theft of electricity as per rules and regulations of the Board. Therefore, there is no question of any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.<br /> 4. In support of his version complainant has produced in evidence affidavits and documents Ex.C1 to C9.<br /> 5. On the other hand opposite parties produced into evidence affidavits and documents Ex.R1 to R17.<br /> 6. We have heard arguments of learned counsel for the parties and perused ocular as well as documentary evidence on the record. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently urged before us that impunged memo No.7254 dated 20/8/07 for slapping punitive amount of Rs.9322/- on the false charge of pilferage of energy is illegal, null and void and contrary to the provisions of Sales Regulations and the Electricity Act, 2003 as the entire case of theft of electricity was managed show on account of vindictiveness of the senior functionaries of the PSEB. On the other hand opposite party Board has justified legality and validity o impunged memo dated 20/8/07 for imposition of penalty amount on account of theft of energy by the complainant clandestinely on the basis of consistent evidence of the officials of the raiding staff.<br /> 7. We have considred rival contentions of counsel for the parties. We find a good deal of merit in the contentions of learned counsel for the complainant. Undoubtedly, opposite party Board has attempted to establish the case of alleged pilferage of electricity on the basis of evidence by way of affidavits Ex.R1 of Er.Malkit Singh Thind SDO, PSEB, that of Er.D.K. Sharda Senior Executive Engineer Ex.R2, affidavit of Er.Satish Pal SDO PSEB Ex.R3 and Ex.R4 affidavit of Er.Sukhdev Singh Sahota J.E. and checking report Ex.R5 and also the complaint to SHO Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi Ex.R6 and impunged notice dated 20/8/07 Ex.R7 and provisional order of asessment Ex.R8. No doubt, it has been consistently alleged by these deponents that at about 1.50 PM a checking party headed by D.K. Sharda alongwith other officials checked the connection of the consumer and detected that consumer removed the neutral and phase grips from the main board and consumer joined a PVC wire of eight to nine metres of length with the joint in the supply line, going in the street adjoining the house of the complainant and other end of the said PVC wire was found connected with a plug through the roof of the house.. The meter of the complainant was fojnd stopped at the time of checking and electricity supply was going on and thus complainant indulged in theft of energy. He was also found using unauthorised load of 4.006 KW over and above the sanctioned load of 2.41 KW. These allegations have been stoutly refuted by the complainant vide affidavit Ex.C1 supported by the neighbourers vide their affidavits Ex.C2 of Surinderpal and Ex.C3 of Daler Singh and affidavit of Kewal Singh Ex.C4 that complainant is circule vice President of Kapurthala Employees Federation PSEB and that raised voice against misbehaviour of S.E. Sh.T.S. Thind towards the employees and protest rally was arranged by the complainant on 17.8.2007 against the S.E. T.S.Thind and SDO Sub Division nO.1 and 2 Sultanpur Lodhi . They further refuted charge of theft of energy vide their consistent version that on 19/8/2007 some officials of the Board came to the house of the complainant carrying with them cable wire and came to the roof of the house and connected the wire with the supply line to prove that he was committing theft of energy and made movie. Bo doubt, they checked connection of the complainant but nothing was found wrong.. However, officials of the Board threatened to teach him a lesson. There was also quarrel between the complainant and officials of the bOard. Later on a false memo dated 20/8/07 was issued for imposing penalty amount of Rs.9322/- on account of alleged pilferage of electric energy. Daler Singh also deposited vide his affidavit Ex.C3 about carrying of wire and laying the same on the roof of complainant's house to connect with the electricity supply line . There is also news item dated 18/8/2007 highlighting grievance against the PSEB by the Kapurthala Employees Federation and the complainant is one of the office bearer. There is also a complaint Ex.R6 dated 20/8/07 about theft of electric energy against the complainant to SHO Police Station. Admittedly no case was registered against the complainant. <br /> On analysis of ocular as well as documentary evidence adduced by the parties, we have, therefore, reason to believe the complainant's version that Police case of pilferage of electric energy was foisted upon the complainant by the senior functionaries of the Board on account of discordial and acrimonious relations of the complainant being employee and officer-bearer of the Kapurthala Employees Federation . Had there been genuineness of theft occurrence , Police would have registered the criminal case against the complainant and prosecuted him . The non registration of criminal case against the complainant by the Police reinforces innocence of the complainant that no case of theft of electric energy was found against him after due investigation by the Police. Opposite party PSEB has tried to establish the case of theft of electric energy vide checking report Ex.R9 dated 19/8/07 and signatures of Kamlesh Rani wife of the complainant thereon and also deposit of amount of Rs.9322/- vide receipt dated 3/9/07. These circumstances do not establish theft case of complainant because as the complainant was presumably coerced to deposit the amount to restore his electric connection illegally disconnected by staging managed show as clearly deposed by the neighbourers of the complainant in their affidavits. No incriminating articles were taken into custody to prove the charge of theft of electricity as it has been clearly held in a case reported as Harbhajan Singh vs. Punjab State Electricity Board RCR 133 that charge of theft of electricity being criminal offence has to be established by cogent and convincing evidence. Mere allegation of pilferage of electricity by the officials of the PSEB is not suffice to establish the same moreso; when no incriminating articles i.e. neutral and pVC wire allegedly used by the complainant in stealing energy was taken into custody as corroborative piece of evidence as per checking report E.R5 though later on there was improved version by the opposite parties in their written statement. We cannot ignore another important piece of evidence of the bills Ex.C7m Ex.C8, Ex.C5 and Ex.C6 that consumption of electricity prior to the alleged theft of energy was more than the post checking period of bills Ex.c5to Ex.C6. Therefore, we cannot ignore the peculiar circumstances of the present case about staging of Dharna and protest rally against senior functionaries of the PSEB by the complainant being office bearer of the Kapurthala Employees Federation which caused indignation to stage managed show of theft of energy against the complainant as vindictive measure. Incidentally direction was issued by this Forum vide order dated 3/9/07 to the opposite parties to restore electric connection subject to deposit of Rs.3107/- i.e. one third amount of the disputed amount of Rs.9322/-.<br /> In the ultimate analysis of aforesaid discussion, we quash the impunged memo dated 20/8/07 and order opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.3107/- deposited by the complainant in compliance of stay order passed by this Forum dated 3/9/07 alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of deposit till realisation and further award Rs.3000/- as monetary compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment due to deficiency in service besides cost of litigation to the tune of Rs.1000/- payable by the opposite parties to the complainant within one month from the receipt of copy of this order.<br /> Let certified copies of judgment rendered be supplied/despatched to the parties without any unnecessary delay and thereafter file be consigned to record room.<br /> <br /> Announced :    ( Surinder Mittal )    ( A.K.Sharma )<br /> 15.4.2008       Member        President.