Order by:

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President

1.       Sh.Harnek Singh, complainant  has filed the instant complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended upto date) on the allegations that an electric connection bearing account no. F21BK630598A with sanctioned load of 4.46 KW is installed in the residential premises of the complainant since a long back in the name of Complainant  and  since the date of installation of the electric connection in question, the complainant is using the said connection and making the payment of the electricity consumption bills regularly as and when received against the receipts and nothing is due against the Complainant except the disputed bill and hence the Complainant is consumer of the Opposite Parties as required under the Consumer Protection Act. The case of the Complainant is that the consumption bill of the Complainant always remains between Rs.3800/- to Rs.6450/-, the detail of which as under:-

Bill dated 23.07.2017    Rs. 6430/- of 925 units            (Ex.C2)      

Bill dated 25.09.2017    Rs. 6450/- of 920 units (Ex.C3)

Bill dated 23.11.2017    Rs.3800/-  of 575 units (Ex.C4)

Bill dated 24.01.2018    Rs.4730/- of  556 units  (Ex.C5)

And these bills are regularly paid against receipts and not disputed by the Opposite Parties. Thereafter, the Complainant received a bill dated 26.03.2018 showing the consumption of bi-monthly consumption of 2587 units of Rs.29723/-, copy of which is Ex.C6. Not only this, in this bill, the Opposite Parties have also shown an amount of Rs.7928/- on account of some ‘sundry charges’ without explaining any reason. The Complainant further alleges that  after receiving the exorbitant bill dated 26.03.2018 (Ex.C6), he immediately approached the office of Opposite Party No.1 and requested to rectify the bill in question and also requested that the Complainant never used the electricity to such extent. But the Opposite Party No.1 did not pay any heed to the request of the Complainant.  But however, the Opposite Party No.1 also suggested the Complainant that if the Complainant has any doubt about the accuracy of the meter in question, he can  get the meter in question checked in the ME laboratory. Hence, the Complainant moved an application to SDO of Opposite Party No.1, copy of which is placed on record as Ex.C7, and requested to get the meter in question checked up in the ME Lab because the Complainant never used the electricity to such extent and at that time, the Opposite Parties also got deposited Rs.120/- from the Complainant on account of meter challenge fee, copy of said receipt is Ex.C8. It is pertinent to mention over here that the Complainant moved the aforesaid application to the Opposite Parties on 28.03.2018 for the checking of the meter installed in his premises,  but the Opposite Parties have removed the meter in question from the premises of the Complainant after about two months i.e. on 17.05.2018. Not only this,  thereafter, the Complainant also received another  bill dated 21.05.2018 for Rs.30310/- of average basis of highest consumption of 925 units of last bills, which is also exorbitant and excessive. Now the Complainant received a bill dated 26.07.2018 (Ex.C10) for an amount of Rs.38,640/- in which an amount of Rs.31436/- has been shown on account of arrears showing the average consumption of 925 units. But however, the complainant never used the electricity to such extent, nor there was any such occasion or function in the premises of the complainant to use such exorbitant consumption.  But however, no separate notice of any kind was ever issued to the complainant before adding this amount in the current consumption charges as required under the law. The Complainant further alleges that after receiving the impugned bill dated 26.07.2018 Ex.C10),  he  again approached the Opposite Parties and requested to rectify the bill in question to the extent of actual consumption of meter. At that time, the Complainant also requested the Opposite Parties that since the meter installed in his premises has been removed on 17.05.1018, but the Opposite Parties did not bother to get checked the meter from the ME Lab to ascertain the actual facts regarding the consumption. At last after more than 3 months i.e. on 23.08.2018 the Complainant was called in the ME Lab and also got his signatures on some blank papers and at that time, one JE of the Opposite Parties orally told that the meter can not be checked in ME Lab as it is found dead. But it is very high handedness on the part of the Opposite Parties that after removing the meter in question from the premises of the Complainant on 17.05.2018 the Opposite Parties remained silent to get the same checked in ME Lab for  more than three months i.e. till 23.08.2018. Whereas as per the procedure laid down in Regulation No.57 of Section III (Energy Meter and Meter Rentals) of the Electricity Supply Instructions Manual, under head Follow-up for damaged meter,  the  defective meter was to be sent to the M.E. Lab immediately within one week after getting the fee deposited to obtain the report of M.E. within 15 days, which remained unexplained.  The Complainant further alleges that  after receiving the impugned bill dated 26.07.2018 (Ex.C10), he approached the officials of the Opposite Parties to rectify the bill in dispute to the extent of actual consumption of reading of new meter, but however, the officials of the Opposite Parties got deposited Rs.7210/- vide receipt dated 10.08.2018 Ex.C9, and made a threat that  the Complainant should deposit the remaining amount of the impugned bill, within a week, otherwise the connection of the Complainant will be disconnected. However the claimed bill is very excessive and is contrary to all the previous bills.  Now on the basis of the alleged exorbitant demand, the opposite parties are bent upon to disconnect the electricity supply of the complainant. Hence, due to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the opposite parties have no right to charge the impugned amount and to disconnect the supply as all the previous bills upto date have been paid, rather the electricity is the basis necessity of life in  these hot days. Hence, the act of the opposite parties is illegal, unwarranted and uncalled for and the amount raised by the opposite parties is liable to be set aside due to their malafide intention and deficiency in service.  The Complainant further alleges that repeated requests have been made by the complainant to the opposite parties to withdraw their illegal exorbitant bill and not indulge the complainant into any litigation, but the opposite parties refused to admit the rightful claim of the complainant. The Complainant further alleges that the service rendered by the Opposite Parties is deficient one. Hence this complaint is filed due to deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.  Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.

a)       The amount of Rs.38,640/- claimed in the bill dated 26.07.2018 on the basis of unexplained addition of arrears may please be set aside and quashed being illegal and uncalled for.

b)      The amount of Rs.50,000/- be allowed to be paid by the opposite parties on account of compensation due to mental tension and harassment caused by the complainant.

c)       The cost of complaint amounting to Rs.10,000/- may please be allowed.

d)      Not to disconnect the electric connection of the complainant due to non payment of the impugned amount till the final adjudication of the present dispute. 

e)       And any other relief to which this Hon’ble Consumer Forum, Moga may deem fit be granted in the interest of justice and equity

2.       Upon notice, none has come present on behalf of Opposite Parties despite proper service  and hence, Opposite Parties were  proceeded against exparte vide order dated 17.01.2019 of this Forum.

3.       In order to  prove  his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents  i.e. copies of bills Ex.C2 to Ex.C6, copy of letter written to SDO, PSPCL, Bhinder Kalan Ex.C7,  copy of receipt of Rs.120/- deposited with Opposite Parties on account of meter checking fee Ex.C8, copy of deposit receipt Ex.C9, copy of bill Ex.C10, copy of authority letter Ex.C11, copy of bill Ex.C12 and closed his evidence.

4.       We have heard the attorney of the Complainant and  have  gone through the documents placed  on record.

5.       From the appraisal of the evidence on record, it becomes evident that an electric connection bearing account no. F21BK630598A with sanctioned load of 4.46 KW is installed in the residential premises of the complainant  and hence the Complainant is consumer of the Opposite Parties as required under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The attorney of the Complainant contended that  the consumption bill of the Complainant always remains between Rs.3800/- to Rs.6450/-, the detail of which as under:-

Bill dated 23.07.2017    Rs. 6430/- of 925 units            (Ex.C2)      

Bill dated 25.09.2017    Rs. 6450/- of 920 units (Ex.C3)

Bill dated 23.11.2017    Rs.3800/-  of 575 units (Ex.C4)

Bill dated 24.01.2018    Rs.4730/- of  556 units  (Ex.C5)

And these bills are regularly paid against receipts and not disputed by the Opposite Parties. Thereafter, the Complainant received a bill dated 26.03.2018 showing the consumption of bi-monthly consumption of 2587 units of Rs.29723/-, copy of which is Ex.C6. Perusal of the copy of the bill dated 26.03.2018 show that an amount of Rs.7928/- on account of some ‘sundry charges’  has been mentioned by the Opposite Parties. The attorney further contended  that  after receiving the exorbitant bill dated 26.03.2018 (Ex.C6), the Complainant immediately approached the office of Opposite Party No.1 and requested to rectify the bill in question and also requested that the Complainant never used the electricity to such extent, but the Opposite Party No.1 did not pay any heed to the request of the Complainant.  Never-the-less, the Opposite Party No.1 also suggested the Complainant that if the Complainant has any doubt about the accuracy of the meter in question, he can  get the meter in question checked in the ME laboratory and   accordingly, the Complainant moved an application to SDO of Opposite Party No.1, copy of which is placed on record as Ex.C7, and requested to get the meter in question checked up in the ME Lab because the Complainant never used the electricity to such extent and at that time, the Opposite Parties also got deposited Rs.120/- from the Complainant on account of meter challenge fee, copy of said receipt is Ex.C8. The Complainant also moved the aforesaid application to the Opposite Parties on 28.03.2018 for the checking of the meter installed in his premises,  but the Opposite Parties have removed the meter in question from the premises of the Complainant after about two months i.e. on 17.05.2018. Not only this,  thereafter, the Complainant also received another  bill dated 21.05.2018 for Rs.30310/- of average basis of highest consumption of 925 units of last bills, which is also exorbitant and excessive. Now the Complainant received a bill dated 26.07.2018 (Ex.C10) for an amount of Rs.38,640/- in which an amount of Rs.31436/- has been shown on account of arrears showing the average consumption of 925 units. But however, the complainant never used the electricity to such extent, nor there was any such occasion or function in the premises of the complainant to use such exorbitant consumption.  But however, no separate notice of any kind was ever issued to the complainant before adding this amount in the current consumption charges as required under the law. As per sub clause 5 (b) referred to section 30 of the Act as laid down in Part-III Punjab govt. Faz. July 27, 2007 (SRVN 5.1929 SAKA). (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters Regulations 2007, Notification no. PSERC/Secy./Regu.31 dated June 29, 2007), the bill for arrears in the case of under assessment or the charges levied as a result of checking etc. will be initially tendered separately and will not be clubbed with the current electricity bill. The arrear bill would briefly indicate the nature and period of the arrears. It is well settled and also laid down as per Regulation No. 124.1 of the Sales Regulations of the Corporation itself, that 'Sundry Charges' cannot be included in the regular electricity bills of the consumers. Regulation No. 124.1 is reproduced herein below:

“there may be certain cases where the consumer is billed for some of the dues relating to previous months/ years or otherwise as arrears on account of under assessment/load or demand surcharge pointed out by internal auditor/detected by the authorized officers either owing to negligence of the Board employees or due to some defect in the metering equipment or due to application of wrong tariff/multiplication factor or due to mistake in connection or other irregularities/malpractice etc. In all such cases, separate bills should be issued giving complete details of the charges levied. Such charges should not be clubbed in the current bills of the consumer.”

The attorney further contended that after receiving the impugned bill dated 26.07.2018 Ex.C10),  the  Complainant again approached the Opposite Parties and requested to rectify the bill in question to the extent of actual consumption of meter. At that time, the Complainant also requested the Opposite Parties that since the meter installed in his premises has been removed on 17.05.1018, but the Opposite Parties did not bother to get checked the meter from the ME Lab to ascertain the actual facts regarding the consumption. At last after more than 3 months i.e. on 23.08.2018 the Complainant was called in the ME Lab and also got his signatures on some blank papers and at that time, one JE of the Opposite Parties orally told that the meter can not be checked in ME Lab as it is found dead. But it is very high handedness on the part of the Opposite Parties that after removing the meter in question from the premises of the Complainant on 17.05.2018 the Opposite Parties remained silent to get the same checked in ME Lab for  more than three months i.e. till 23.08.2018. Whereas as per the procedure laid down in Regulation No.57 of Section III (Energy Meter and Meter Rentals) of the Electricity Supply Instructions Manual, under head Follow-up for damaged meter, it has been provided under sub section 57.3 that:

“The damaged/burnt meter along with first report will be forwarded to ME laboratory by AE/AEE/XEN (DS), within one week after the damaged meter is replaced after recovering the cost of the meter from the consumer. The officer Incharge of ME Laboratory after carrying out the test checks, shall send his report to AE/AEE/XEN(DS) concerned within 15 days in case of various categories of consumers except MS, LS & BS categories of consumers for which report shall be given by MMTS for taking further action, if any in the matter.”

Hence, as required as per clause 57.3, referred to above. As to why the said meter was not sent to the M.E. Lab immediately within one week after getting the fee deposited to obtain the report of M.E. within 15 days, which remained unexplained.  Apart from the above, in Regulation No.59 of Section III (Energy Meter and Meter Rentals) of the Electricity Supply Instructions Manual, under head Checking the accuracy of meters/adjustment of account, it has been provided under sub section 59.1 to 59.3 as under:

59.1 Steps to be taken for routine checking of the energy meters:

i) In order to ascertain whether the meter is working or not, Meter Readers should switch on one or two lights for a few seconds before taking monthly meter reading and watch that the meter reading advances in the correct direction.

ii) Meter Inspectors, JEs, AE/AEE/XEN(DS) and AEE/XEN/Sr.XEN/ Addl. SE (Enforcement) shall conduct the accuracy test at site with the help of meter testing instrument.

59.2 Whenever a meter is found to be in-operative by any employee other than AEE/XEN/Sr. XEN/ASE (Enforcement) of the PSPCL, the matter should be brought to the notice of AE/AEE/XEN(DS) in writing so that immediate steps may be taken to replace it and for taking any other action as considered necessary.

59.3 Whenever a meter is found to be inaccurate by Sr.XEN/Addl. SE (Enforcement), the matter should be brought to the notice of AE/ AEE /XEN(DS) and SR.XEN/Addl.SE(MMTS) (particularly in respect of large supply consumers) in writing. On receipt of the report, the Sr.XEN/Addl. SE(MMTS) shall check the accuracy of that meter at site in the presence of the consumer after which immediate steps shall be taken by AE/AEE/XEN(DS) to replace the inaccurate meter and also to take other action as required pursuant to the checking.

6.       But there is no such evidence that any official of the Opposite Parties  has taken any such steps to comply with these Regulations. Why these Regulations have not been adhered to by the Opposite Parties, also remained unexplained. As stated above, after receiving the impugned bill daed 26.07.2018 (Ex.C10), the complainant approached the officials of the Opposite Parties to rectify the bill in dispute to the extent of actual consumption of reading of new meter, but however, the officials of the Opposite Parties got deposited Rs.7210/- vide receipt dated 10.08.2018 Ex.C9, and made a threat that  the Complainant should deposit the remaining amount of the impugned bill, within a week, otherwise the connection of the Complainant will be disconnected. However the claimed bill is very excessive and is contrary to all the previous bills.  Now on the basis of the alleged exorbitant demand, the opposite parties are bent upon to disconnect the electricity supply of the complainant. Hence, due to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the opposite parties have no right to charge the impugned amount and to disconnect the supply as all the previous bills upto date have been paid, rather the electricity is the basis necessity of life in  these hot days. Hence, the act of the opposite parties is illegal, unwarranted and uncalled for and the amount raised by the opposite parties is liable to be set aside due to their malafide intention and deficiency in service.  The attorney further contended  that repeated requests have been made by the complainant to the opposite parties to withdraw their illegal exorbitant bill and not indulge the complainant into any litigation, but the opposite parties refused to admit the rightful claim of the complainant. The Complainant further alleges that the service rendered by the Opposite Parties is deficient one. The evidence produced by the complainant has gone unrebutted on record as  the Opposite Parties,  despite due service, did not opt to appear and contest the proceedings. In this way, the Opposite Parties  have impliedly admitted the correctness of the allegations made in the complaint. It also shows that Opposite Parties have no defence to offer or defend the complaint. The complainant has sought for direction to the Opposite Parties  to set aside the  amount of Rs.38,640/- claimed in the bill dated 26.07.2018 on the basis of unexplained addition of arrears and also pay  an amount of Rs.50,000/- on account of compensation due to mental tension and harassment caused by the complainant and Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.

7.       In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the amount of Rs.38,640/- claimed in the bill dated 26.07.2018 alongwith Surcharge, interest and penalty imposed upon it, if any. Opposite Parties are also directed to adjust the  amount of Rs.7,210/- in his future consumer bills which was deposited by the Complainant vide receipt Ex.C9 dated 10.08.2018. The Opposite Parties are also directed to adjust the  amount in future consumption bills of the Complainant or to refund the same except the actual consumption charges which was deposited by the Complainant vide receipt dated 05.12.2019 i.e. during the pendency of the present complaint.    The Opposite Parties are also directed to pay lump sum compensation  of Rs.5000/- (Five thousand only) on account of harassment, mental tension  and litigation expenses, to the Complainant. The compliance of this order be made by the Opposite Parties within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the Complainant shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this Forum. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

8.       Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.

This complaint could not be decided within the prescribed period because the government has not appointed any of the two Whole Time Members in this Forum since 15.09.2018. Moreover, the President of this Forum is doing additional duty at District Consumer Forum, Fatehgarh Sahib as well as  Sangrur. There is only one working day in a week when the quorum of this Forum remains complete.  

Announced in Open Forum

Dated: 22.01.2020.