DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA.

CC.No.276 of 14-06-2012

Decided on 19-07-2013

Rajinder Singh aged about 55 years S/o Bhappa Singh R/o H.No.4978, Aggarwal/Afim Wali Gali, Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1.Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall Patiala, through its Chairman/Secretary.

2.SDO/AEE, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., City Sub Division, Bathinda.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.

Sh.Amarjeet Paul, Member.

Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member.

Present:-

For the Complainant: Sh.Ashok Gupta, counsel for the complainant.

For Opposite parties: Sh.M.L Bansal, counsel for opposite parties.

ORDER

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is holding an electricity connection bearing No.GA53/109. The complainant received the memo No.1010 dated 14.5.2012 from the opposite party No.2 and it has been mentioned in the said memo that the meter of the complainant was checked on 5.5.2012 by the Meter Inspector and the mechanical meter has been installed in the house of the complainant and repair work of the ornament was going on. As such a case of unauthorized use of the electricity was prepared and demand of Rs.16,817/- was raised. The complainant wrote a letter to the opposite party No.2 on 21.5.2012 and apprised all the facts regarding the residential house and no commercial work was going on. The opposite parties also issued the memo No.1342 dated 8.6.2012 to the complainant. The complainant challenged the said memos on various grounds. Hence the complainant has filed the present complaint to seek the directions to the opposite parties to quash the memo Nos.1010 dated 14.5.2012 and 1342 dated 8.6.2012 alongwith cost and compensation.

2. Notice was sent to the opposite parties. The opposite parties after appearing before this Forum have filed their joint written statement and pleaded that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this forum and has not approached the forum with clean hands. The complainant is indulged in unauthorized use of the electricity i.e. using his domestic electricity connection for NRS purpose. During checking it was found that Kartik Gopal Manna and his staff were doing the work of jewellary which comes under NRS category. The checking report was prepared in the presence of Kartik Gopal Manna tenant of Nathu Ram consumer and the copy of the checking report was handed over to Kartik Gopal Manna but he refused to receive the same and also refused to put his signature on it. The complainant wrote a letter on 21.5.2012 which has been written on the basis of false facts.

3. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

4. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

5. A perusal of record placed on file shows that vide Ex.C-3 the opposite parties issued the final order of assessment for unauthorized use of electricity under section 126 of Electricity Act 2003 vide memo No.1342 dated 8.6.2012 to the complainant and the demand of Rs.16,817/- was raised. As per law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.5466 of 2012 (arising out of SLP (C) No.35906 of 2011) decided on 1.7.2013, in case titled U.P Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Anis Ahmad reported in III (2013) CPJ 1 (SC) in para No.46 it has been held:-

“46) The acts of indulgence in 'unauthorized use of electricity' by a person, as defined in clause (b) of the Explanation below Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 neither has any relationship with “unfair trade practice” or “restrictive trade practice” or “deficiency in service” nor does it amounts to hazardous services by the licensee. Such acts of “unauthorized use of electricity” has nothing to do with charging price in excess of the price. Therefore, acts of person in indulging in 'unauthorized use of electricity', do not fall within the meaning of 'complaint' as we have noticed above and therefore the 'complaint' against assessment under section 126 is not maintainable before the Consumer Forum.....”

Thus in the light of above settled law by the Hon'ble Apex Court this complaint is not maintainable in the consumer forum. Thus this complaint is hereby dismissed without any order as to cost, the merits of the complaint are not touched. The complainant is at liberty to approach the appropriate court/authority for the redressal of his grievance if so advised and permitted by law.

6. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced in the open Forum

19-07-2013

(Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

President

(Amarjeet Paul)

Member

(Sukhwinder Kaur) Member