Punjab

Faridkot

CC/19/205

Nishi Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

A.K. Monga

10 Sep 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  COMMISSION,  FARIDKOT

                                                                        C.C. No :                  205 of 2019

           Date of Institution :   20.08.2019

                                                                        Date of Decision :      10.09.2024

Nishi Gupta wife of Lalit Mohan Gupta, Advocate son of Bimal Kumar Gupta, resident of House No.B-VI/4142, Mohalla Talab, Faridkot.

                                                             ...Complainant

Versus

1. Chairman cum Managing Director, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall, Patiala.
2. Assistant Executive Engineer, DS  City Sub Division, PSPCL, Faridkot.                                                                            .......Ops

 

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

(Now, under Section 35 of C.P. Act, 2019)

 

Quorum: Sh Rakesh Kumar Singla, President,

                Smt Param Pal Kaur, Member.

 

Present: Sh Ashok Monga, Ld Counsel for complainant,

    Sh Mohan Singh Brar, Ld Counsel for OPs.

* * * * * *

ORDER

(Rakesh Kumar Singla, President)

                                           Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd etc/Ops seeking directions to Ops to rearrange the consumption bill in respect of account no.3000436454 installed at the premises of complainant from NRS Tariff to DS and to withdraw the illegal demand of Rs.1,27,622/-raised vide bill dated

cc no.-205 of 2019

08.07.2019  and for further directing them to issue revised bill and also prayed for direction to OPs to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as litigation expenses and any other relief that this Commission may deem fit.

2                                           Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that she is having domestic supply electric connection bearing a/c no 3000436454 running in her premises. It is submitted that husband of complainant is a senior citizen and he is an advocate by profession and he holds his office at ground floor of their house and they reside at first floor. It is further submitted that complainant has two daughters : one is settled at Chandigarh and other is at Ludhiana and premises in question as well as their house at Adarsh Nagar are being used by complainant and her husband purely for residential purposes. Further submitted that OPs have been issuing bills to complainant on commercial supply and are charging commercial rates since 15.03.20211 though no commercial activity is being carried out  there. Premises in question are dwelling unit as neither any article is sold or purchased there nor any kind of other commercial activity is being done there, but OPs act of OPs in charging NRS tariff rates to complainant for consumption of electricity, has caused inconvenience and financial difficulties to complainant. It is alleged that complainant received a bill dated 08.07.2019 for Rs.1,27,622/-, which is very excessive and on receiving the same, complainant approached OP-2 and requested them to revise the bill and issue a fresh bill calculated on the basis of domestic supply rates and also requested them to rearrange and revise the previous bill, but they

cc no.-205 of 2019

flatly refused to hear her genuine requests and threatened to disconnect the electric connection, is she fails to pay the entire amount in time. All this amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs and this act and conduct of Ops has caused great inconvenience, harassment and mental tension to complainant for which she has prayed for seeking directions to Ops to withdraw the impugned bill and prayed for compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him besides litigation expenses. Hence, this complaint.

3                                                         Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dt 21.08.2019,  complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.

4                                            On receipt of the notice, the opposite parties appeared in the Commission through their counsel and filed written statement taking preliminary objections that complainant herself applied for connection under NRS category as it is admitted that lower portion of the house is being used for commercial purpose and upper portion of same is being used by her family for residential purpose. However, on merits, ld counsel for OPs has denied all the allegations of the complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted that plea taken by complainant is contradictory as in one breath complainant is claiming that upper portion of premises in question is being used as residence and in the same breath she is saying that her residence is in Adarash Nagar. It

cc no.-205 of 2019

is averred that complainant never applied and submitted before OPs that premises are being used for domestic category and not for commercial activity. It is totally denied that complainant ever applied for NRS category and regarding checking the connection. As per OPs, bill in question is correctly issued as per assessment made and has been issued as per rules and regulations of the PSPCL.  Further averred that complainant entered into bilateral contract with PSPCL and tariff cannot be changed from the back date. All the other allegations and the allegation with regard to relief sought too are denied being wrong and incorrect and it is reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

5                                               Parties were given proper opportunities to produce evidence to prove their respective case. Counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to 4 and closed the same.

6                                        To controvert the allegations of complainant, ld counsel for OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of Gaurav Kakkar, AEO, PSPCL, Faridkot as Ex OP-1, documents Ex OP-2 to OP-16 and thereafter, closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.

7                                    We have heard the ld counsel for complainant as well as OPs and have carefully gone through the evidence and documents placed on record by respective parties.

 

cc no.-205 of 2019

8                                   From the careful perusal of documents and evidence placed on record and after going through the arguments advanced by complainant counsel, it is observed that grievance of the complainant is that OPs have been charging NRS tariff instead of DS tariff for electricity connection installed at her house. Though no commercial activity is being done at her house but despite repeated requests, OPs have not paid any heed to her genuine requests for charging domestic supply tariff to her connection. On the other hand , plea taken by OPs is that amount in question has been charged as per rules and regulations of the PSPCL and complainant is liable to pay the same.

9                                     Ld Counsel for OPs has brought our attention towards Rule X (e) given in Electricity Supply Instructions Manual (First Edition-2010) which is reproduced as hereunder :

X (e) If a portion of household is predominantly used for the conduct of business, the consumption in that portion will be separately metered under a separate connection and billed under NRS tariff. In such an event, two connections, one under Schedule DS and the other under Schedule NRS can be allowed otherwise the total consumption shall be billed under NRS. In case of villages, where the house owners keep milch animals for their lively hood, shall be covered under DS tariff.

 

 

cc no.-205 of 2019

10                                  Ld Counsel for OPs further brought our attention towards instructions given in Electricity Supply Instructions Manual at point 3.3.8 (d) which is given hereunder as:

If a portion of residential/industrial premises is regularly used for any commercial activity permitted under law, the consumer shall be required to obtain a separate connection under NRS category for the portion put to commercial use. In such an event, two connection, one under Schedule DS/Industrial and the other under Schedule NRS shall be permitted.

11                                          Ld Counsel for complainant has also placed reliance on judgement given by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Writ-C NO.2637 of 2023 date of decision 03.08.2023 in case titled as Tehsil Bar Association, Sadar Tehsil Parisar Vs U.P. Power Corporation Limited and others wherein it is held that activities/profession of advocate is not a commercial activity attracting commercial rate of electricity consumption as prescribed in Rade Schedule LMV-2, as applicable in State of U.P. approved by U.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission.

12                                         He has also placed reliance on judgment given by Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition No.1985 and Civil Misc. No. 28888 of 1985 date of decision 03.02.1987 titled as Punjab & Haryana High Court Bar Association and another Vs

cc no.-205 of 2019

 Chandigarh Administration and others, which was allowed and imposition of higher charges for water consumption on residential buildings or any part thereof used for professional purposes by a lawyer is struck down. Vide this order, it is held that clubbing of residential building used for professional purposes by a lawyer, for the purposes of determining the rate of water consumed, with educational institutions, hospitals, community centres, charitable institutes and buildings used a Government offices, religious institutions and Dhobi Ghats is wholly arbitrary, whimsical and irrational and is violation of Article 14 of the Constitution

13                                   It is observed that complainant has been occupying the residential unit in residential area for residential purpose and only a small portion of this unit has been set up for legal work by her husband. Mere setting up a small area of residential unit for legal work would not change the predominant use of property and we find that charging small portion of house separately at non residential or commercial rate is not genuine.  Moreover, in the light of order passed by Allahabad High Court in Writ C No.2637 of 2023 (supra), profession of an advocate is not a commercial activity attracting commercial rate of electricity consumption. NRS tariff for commercial activities, cannot be applied for electricity supplied to the Lawyers Chambers and Lawyers’ Chambers or offices shall be charged only under Domestic Supply category. Thus,  action of OPs in charging NRS tariff for the house of complainant is not appropriate.

cc no.-205 of 2019

14                                    Keeping in view the facts on record, evidence, pleadings and arguments put forward by respective parties, this Commission of considered opinion that rules brought forward by ld counsel for OPs are not applicable in present case.  Hence, complaint in hand is hereby partly allowed. Ops are directed to withdraw the bill dated 08.07.2019 charged on NRS tariff and are directed to recalculate and issue revised bills from 08.07.2019 at the rate of DS tariff. OPs are further directed to adjust the amount of Rs.50,000/-if  paid by complainant in compliance of order dated 21.08.2019 in revised bills to be issued in future on the basis of Domestic Supply Tariff. Ops are further directed to pay Rs.5000/-to complainant as consolidated compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by complainant and for litigation expenses incurred on present complaint.

15                           Compliance of this order be made positively within 45 days of receipt of the copy of this order.

16                        Complaint could not be decided within stipulated period due to heavy pendency of work and incomplete quorum.

17                           Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law.  File be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Commission :

Dated: 10.09.2024

 

(Param Pal Kaur)                (Rakesh Kumar Singla)

                    Member                                    President