Des Raj has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 requiring the opposite parties to withdraw the illegal and unlawful sundry charges and charge the bills under DS tariff and to restore the electric connection of the complainant and also to refund the excess amount charged under NRS tariff in the bills and to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental tension, harassment and inconvenience besides Rs.2,500/- as litigation expenses.<br /> 2. The complainant averred in his complaint that he is the consumer of the opposite parties having a domestic electric connection in his name bearing account No. BL-18/0118. The complainant is having his residence on the chobaras of the shop and the connection in question is being used for purely domestic purposes, and no commercial activity is carried on the said connection. The meter of the connection is installed outside the premises of the shop in a MCB and the connection was released under DS category and is being used purely for domestic use. This fact can be verified by checking of the connection any time. For commercial activity in the shop a separate connection of NRS category bearing account No. BL-18/114 is also installed and load of the shop has no concern with the load of the house in any manner. The opposite parties charged an amount of Rs.6406/- as sundry in the bill without any detail and on enquiry it transpired that the amount has been charged on account of difference of DS and NRS tariff which is quite illegal and against the rules of the PSEB. The opposite parties further started charging NRS tariff to the domestic connection of the complainant from the bill issued on 19/1/2007 and 17/3/2007 which is quite illegal and against the rules of the PSEB. After receipt of the bill the complainant approached the opposite party No. 2 with the request to withdraw the illegal sundry charges and also to withdraw the inflated bills issued on 19/1/2007 and 17/3/2007 and charge the bills as per domestic tariff but the opposite party No. 2 did not agree with the complainant rather has disconnected the connection of the complainant which amounts to clear cut deficiency in services on the part of the opposite parties. The act and conduct of the opposite parties has caused a great mental tension and harassment to the complainant for which he claims Rs.20,000/- as compensation and Rs.2500/- as litigation expenses. Hence this complaint. <br /> 3. The counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 3-5-2007 complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties. <br /> 4. On receipt of the notice the opposite parties appeared through Sh. Rajneesh Garg Advocate and filed written reply taking preliminary objections that the opposite parties have constituted various dispute settlement committee so as to settle the disputes between the parties, but the present complainant has not put his case before the said committee. As such the present complaint in the present form is not maintainable. The opposite parties have not been properly impleaded as such the complaint is liable to be dismissed on mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties. The complainant was not using the connection for the purpose for which he had obtained the said connection. He has broken the terms and conditions and has also not followed the rules and regulations as such the present complaint is not maintainable. The complainant does not come under the definition of consumer as defined under the Consumer Protection Act as such is liable to be dismissed. On merits it is admitted that the present connection is installed in the premises of the complainant but he is not consumer of the opposite parties. The present connection was not used for domestic purpose. The officials of the opposite parties checked the electricity connection of the complainant on 8/11/2006 and during checking it was found that the present electricity connection was being used to supply the electricity to the shop of the complainant. Moreover the sanctioned load of this connection is 1 KW whereas at the time of checking the connected load on this connection was 1.433 KWs. The complainant was using this connection to supply the electricity to the shop. The connection was being used for domestic purpose. At the time of checking the electricity was being supplied from this connection to his shop. The present amount has been charged on account of difference of DS and NRS tariff as the electricity was being supplied to his shop from this connection. The complete details regarding amount was given to the complainant but the complainant failed to deposit the amount so the present amount has been charged in the bill. A sum of Rs.5456/- has been charged on account of difference of tariff between DS and NRs and a sum of Rs.950/- has been charged on account of security as the complainant was using excess load than the sanctioned one. There is no deficiency on service on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant is not entitled to any compensation and litigation expenses. So the complaint be dismissed with costs. <br /> 5. Both the parties wanted to lead evidence to prove their respective pleadings and proper opportunity was given to them. The complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, copies of bills Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-5, copy of application dated 6/2/2007 Ex.C-6, affidavit of Des Raj Complainant Ex.C-7, copy of bill receipt dated 30/5/2007 Ex.C-8 and closed his evidence. <br /> 6. In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant the opposite parties tendered in their evidence affidavit of Charanjit Singh Mann AEE Ex.R-1, checking report Ex.R-2 and Ex.R-3, copy of register Ex.R-4 and Ex.R-5 and closed the evidence of the opposite parties by order of the Forum dated 26/7/2007. <br /> 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have very carefully gone through the affidavits and documents on the file. Our observations and findings are as under.<br /> 8. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the opposite parties have issued bill dated 19/1/2007 making demand of Rs.6406/- on account of difference of domestic and non residential connection consumption charges which is excessive and not in accordance with law. Demand made by the opposite parties is illegal. <br /> 9. Learned counsel for the opposite parties has submitted that the complainant was using the domestic connection by connecting the load of the NRS connection to save money. The opposite parties have rightly calcualed the difference of NRS and DS consumption charges so complaint is liable to be dismissed. <br /> 10. Admittedly the complainant is having two electric connections one is domestic electric connection account No. BL-18/0118 and other is NRS electric connection bearing account No. BL-18/0114. The opposite checked the electric connections of the complainant on 8/11/2006. They reported that electric connection No. BL-18/0114 which is NRS connection should be immediately shifted of the electricity through meter at the outer door of the premises of the complainant. This checking report Ex.R-2 has been signed by Des Raj complainant. <br /> 11. The checking report Ex.R-3 related to the domestic connection was having sanctioned load of 1 KW. It had connected load 1.433 KWs. It was being used as NRS connection by way of operating bhatti motor of 1/2 BHP. It was reported that the load was connected through the meter for use of the same for commercial purpose in the shop the sweets were being prepared. As per the rules the action be taken. Des Raj has put his signatures on this report. The calculations have been made by the concerned officials. Impugned bills dated 19/1/2007 and 17/3/2007 have been issued by the opposite parties. <br /> 12. From perusal of the copy of the register for overhauling the accounts of the complainant Ex.R-4 and Ex.R-5 it is made out that the opposite parties have calcualed difference of the load in accordance with rules and regulations of the PSEB. <br /> 13. The complainant have misused domestic electric connection by connecting the load of NRS electric connection to pay less amount of consumption charges to the opposite parties. This type of use of electricity tentamounts to theft of energy or committing fraud with the opposite parties. So the letter Ex.C-6 dated 6/2/2007 of the complainant with regard to getting corrected charges of domestic supply electric connection is not helpful to the complainant in any manner. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. So the complaint being devoid of merits is dismissed. However there is no order as to costs due to peculiar circumstances of the case. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room. <br /> Announced in open Forum:<br /> Dated: 15/10/2007<br /> <br /> <br />