ORDER

SURINDER MOHAN (President)

Present complaint has been filed under the Consumer Protection Act. Brief facts of the complaint are that complainant is consumer of opposite parties having electric connection bearing A/C No.AK59/870 and has been paying the electricity bills regularly. That opposite parties raised demand of Rs.36924/- vide demand notice No.149 dated 10/2/2011 on account of theft of energy. That opposite parties never checked the house of the complainant in his presence or in the presence of any family member nor complainant was ever found committing theft of energy. .Opposite parties have not followed the procedure as mandatory under Regulation No.37 of Electricity Supply Code. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and the impunged demand notice is illegal and wrong and is liable to be quashed. A prayer for directing the opposite parties to quash the illegal demand notice and to pay Rs.10000/- as special cost for illegal demand and harassment and cost of litigation has also been made.

2. In reply it is pleaded that complainant has got no cause of action to file the present complaint. Addl.SE Enforcement alongwith staff visited the premises of complainant on 1/2/2011 and checked the connection in the presence of the complainant and found complainant committing theft of energy by way of joining one end of

6 feet white colour wire with the help of a wooden stick with the PVC joint of wire passing nearby the bathroom of the house of the complainant and inserted other end of the said white colour wire in the socket of the bathroom and kit-kat was removed by the complainant and made the meter stand still. When the team removed the wire and inserted kit-kat, the meter started working. Thus it was clear cut case of theft of energy. The checking team took the white wire in their custody and the same was handed over to JE City Sub Division No.2 for safe custody.. The team recorded their observations alongwith other particulars of the meter in their checking register at No.24/257 dated 1/2/2011.. The team signed the checking report and supplied the copy of the same to the complainant who received the same but refused to sign the checking report. Another copy was pasted on the front door of the house of the complainant. As such demand notice vide memo No.149 dated 10/2/2011 was sent to the complainant with the copy of checking report demanding Rs.36924/-. Another memo NO.150 dated 12/2/2011 was sent to SHO Anti Theft PS, Jalandhar for registration of a case. Other paras of the complaint have been denied and opposite parties prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3. In order to prove his case Ex.C1 affidavit of Joginder Singh Ex.C2 memo No.149 dated 10/2/11.

4. To rebut this evidence Ex.R1 to R3 affidavits, Ex.R4 checking report, Ex.R5 and R6 memo No.149 and memo No.150 dated 10/2/11.

5. We have heard arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the file. The case of the complainant is that he nver committed any theft of energy and opposite parties have wrongly raised demand of Rs.36924/-. The opposite parties never checked/raided the house of the complainant in his resence or in the presence of any family member. Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that no photograph or video was taken by the opposite parties showing complainant committing theft of energy. No seizure memo was ever prepared. Similarly no checking report was prepared at the spot.

On the other hand case of the opposite parties is that checking was conducted on 1/2/11 at about 6.50 AM and complainant was found committing theft of energy by joining one end of 6 feet white colour wire with the help of a wooden stick with the PVC joint of wire passing nearby the bathroom of the house of the complainant and inserted other end of the said white colour wire in the socket of the bathroom and kit-kat was removed by the complainant and made the meter stand still. The opposite parties have given vivid description as to how the complainant was committing theft of energy. The white wire was also seized at the spot which was handed over to the JE city sub division II for safe custody. The case of the opposite parties is supported by Lal Vishwas Bains SDO, Er.B.S. Matharu Addl.SE and Er.Anil Dhawan JE by way of their affidavits. Memo No.149 dated 10/2/11 which is Ex.C2 as well as Ex.R5 on the file was sent to the complainant under section 135 of Indian Electricity Act read with Regulation No.37. Memo No.150 dated 10/2/11 which is Ex.R6 on the file was also sent to SHO Anti theft PS Jalandhar. During the arguments, learned counsel for the opposite parties conceded that no provisional assessment order under section 126 of Indian Electricity Act has been served upon Joginder Singh . As per section 126 of Indian Electricity Act the assessing authority is bound to pass provisional assessment order and to call upon objections from the consumer and after giving personal hearing , the assessing officer is bound to pass final assessment order. Opposite parties have failed to do so, therefore, demand raised vide memo No.149 dated 10/2/11 is set aside. The assessing authority is ordered to pass provisional assessment order and to invite objections from the consumer and after giving personal hearing to pass final assessment order. The assessing officer will pass provisional assessment order within 10 days from the date of receipt of this order. In case complainant refuses to receive provisional assessment order or final assessment order as the case may be, opposite parties will send notice/order as per Regulation-44 by way of courier service or registered cover. The amount deposited by the complainant is not being refunded to him. In case the assessing officer fails to comply with the directions of this Forum, complainant will be entitled to refund of Rs.18500/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of deposit till final realisation Parties are left to bear their own costs.

Copies of order be communicated to the parties without delay free of cost by registered post and file be consigned to the record room.

Announced Shashi Narang Surinder Mohan

18.5.2011 Member President.