BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.481 of 2018

Date of Instt. 19.11.2018

Date of Decision:28.06.2022

Santokh Singh s/o Late S. Resham Singh aged about 56 years r/o 428, Krishna Nagar, Jalandhar City.

..........Complainant

Versus

1.       Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. Head Office, The Mall,   Patiala, through its CMD.

2.       Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. Model Town Commercial,       Sub Division Maqsudan, Jalandhar City through its SDO/AEE.

….….. Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj             (President)

                   Smt. Jyotsna                            (Member)

                   Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon       (Member)   

Present:       Sh. Arvind Sharda, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.

                   Sh. S. K. S. Chhabra, Adv. Counsel for OPs No.1 and 2.

Order

Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj(President)

1.                The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that the complainant has taken domestic supply electricity connection from the OPs under account bearing no.J74GC230323K. The complainant had been paying regularly energy consumption bills to the OPs and nothing is due to be paid out of the regular energy consumption bills to the OPs. In the month of November, 2017 the electricity meter of the aforementioned electricity connection got burnt. The complainant duly informed the OPs about the said incident. The OPs instructed the complainant to deposit of sum of Rs.520/- towards the cost of a new meter. The OPs further assured the complainant that a new meter would be installed at the premises of the complainant within one week of the said deposit. Action upon the complaint of the complainant, the OPs energized the premises of the complainant through direct supply. On 09.11.2017, the complainant deposited of Rs.520/- with the OPs. The complainant had many a times requested the OPs to install a new meter over there but of no avail. On the contrary, the OPs are raising energy consumption bills arbitrarily against the rules. Now the complainant has raised an energy consumption bill dated 11.10.2018 for an amount of Rs.27,520/- to be paid by 05.11.2018. After receiving the impugned bill, the complainant approached the OP No.2 to know the reason of raising such a huge bill. To this, the OP No.2 has advised the complainant that in case the said electricity bill was not deposited by the complainant in time, the supply of electricity to the premises of the complainant would be disconnected. The impugned bill dated 21.10.2018 amounting Rs.27,520/- has not been issued on the basis of correct consumption of units of electricity and is illegal, null and void and is liable be quashed. This act of the OPs of raising inflated bill and their unexplainable act of not installing a new meter despite receiving its cost more then one year ago and their threatening to disconnect the supply of electricity to the premises of the complainant for non-deposit of impugned bill dated 21.10.2018, has caused mental harassment to the complainant and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to quash the regular energy consumption bill dated 21.10.2018 amounting Rs.27,520/- and charge the complainant on the basis of correct consumption of electricity and further OPs be directed to pay Rs.22,000/- to complainant towards compensation for causing harassment to the complainant and Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, who filed its joint written reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the complaint filed by the complainant is false, frivolous and vexatious to the knowledge of the complainant and has been filed just to harass the answering OPs. It is further averred that the complaint filed by the complainant is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of the necessary party. It is further averred that the complainant not approached the Commission with clean hands. The meter of the complainant was burnt as such the bills of the consumer was prepared with R code i.e. bill October 2017, January 2018, March 2018, April 2018, June 2018, September 2018, October 2018 and after installation of new meter in the premises of the consumer the accurate reading was made and the bill dated 17.12.2018 with O code was properly prepared and served to the consumer demanding the Rs.16,480/- from the consumer which the consumer is legally bound to pay the same. But this is matter of very strange and high handiness on the behalf of the consumer that he intentionally and deliberately not mentioned about the bill dated 17.12.2018 in which the amount of Rs.16,480/- was made from the consumer. The consumption date prepared as per the rules and regulations of the PSPCL of R Code period. It is further averred that the Commission is having no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint. No cause of action arose to the complainant against the answering OPs rather cause of action arisen to the answering OPs against the complainant for dragging the answering OPs in the false and frivolous litigation. On merits, it is admitted that the meter of the complainant was burnt and complainant deposited Rs.520/- towards the cost of new meter, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3.                Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.

4.                In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties produced on the file their respective evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file as well as written arguments submitted by counsel for the complainant very minutely.

6.                The complainant has challenged the electricity bill raising the charges amounting to Rs.27,520/- as per Ex.C-4. The case of the complainant is that the electricity meter of the complainant was burnt in November, 2017 and the new meter was never installed even after the receipt of the charges for the installation of the new meter. It has been alleged by the complainant that since then the bill of the complainant was prepared with ‘R’ code knowing fully well that the meter was burnt. The OPs have not followed the regulations 21.4.1 and 26.1 of the Electricity Supply Instruction Manual. The complainant has relied upon the law M/s Tirupati Industries Vs. Punjab State Electricity Board and has also relied upon the regulations 21.4.1 and 26.1 of Electricity Supply Instruction Manual.

7.                On the other hand, the contention of the OPs is that as per the office record, the bill of the consumer has been generated on R code i.e. on average basis due to burnt meter from 22.08.2017 to 31.10.2018 and the meter was changed on 01.11.2018. It has been alleged that the complainant/consumer has not paid any bill since 04.09.2017 except the payment of Rs.13,760/- as ordered by the Commission. It has been alleged by the complainant that the amount of Rs.27,520/- in the bill Ex.C-4 is the accumulation of unpaid bill from 22.08.2017 to 31.10.2018 and the arrears of the consumer upto 07/2021 of Rs.29,239/- is waived as per commercial circular 38/2021 issued by PSPCL till 16.06.2022.

8.                From the documents produced on record by both the parties as well as pleadings of the parties, the disputed period of the bill is alleged by the OP is 22.08.2017 till October 2018, whereas as per the complainant, the ‘R’ Code bill was prepared for the period October, 2017 to November, 2018. As per allegations of the OPs, the bill on ‘R’ Code was issued due to burnt meter from 22.08.2017, whereas as per the pleadings of the complainant, the meter of the complainant got burnt in the month of November, 2017. Ex.C-1 is the bill from 19 June, 2017 to 22 August, 2017 for 64 days and this bill was issued on ‘O’ Code, means Normal and as per both the parties, till that date the meter was intact, but it is the complainant who has not made the payment of this bill. The next bill is Ex.C-2 i.e. from 22 August, 2017 to 23 October, 2017. As per the complainant at that time also the meter was intact, whereas as per the contention of the OPs, the bill was sent on ‘R’ Code due to burnt meter. Similarly, the bill Ex.C-2, Ex.C-3 and Ex.C-4 are the bills issued on ‘R’ Code for Rs.4950/-, Rs.6620/- and Rs.27,520/- respectively. In the column of Previous Payments Status in Ex.C-2, zero payment has been shown, whereas in Ex.C-3 and Ex.C-4 the status of Previous Payment Status has been shows as ‘R’ Code, meaning thereby that there is no reference of the previous payment alleged by the OPs. If we peruse the bills relied upon by the OPs, which are Ex.OPA/Ex.C-2, this shows the variation in the net amount of Rs.10/-. Both the bills are computer generated. Similarly in Ex.OP-B/Ex.C-3, the arrears in Ex.C-3 have been shows as Rs.3816/-, whereas in Ex.OP-B, the arrears of current financial year has been shown as Rs.3883/-. There is again a variation of the amount in both the bills, which relate to the same period and are computer generated. These bills have been issued on the basis of ‘R’ Code. The bills Ex.OP-C, Ex.OP-D, Ex.OP-E, Ex.OP-F and Ex.OP-G have been issued on the basis of ‘R’ Code and again there is a variation of the amount of Rs.10/- in both Ex.C-4 and Ex.OP-G. Ex.OP-H shows that this bill was issued on the basis of ‘O’ Code i.e. from 21.10.2018 to 17.12.2018. As per the submission of the OPs, the meter was changed on 01.11.2018, whereas the bill has been issued from 21.10.2018 to 17.12.2018 i.e. the period during which the meter remained burnt has also been covered in this bill. Ex.OP-I and Ex.OP-J show the detail of the bills issued by the OPs. So, it is admitted fact that the meter of the complainant remained burnt for about one year and despite the depositing of the fee for the change of the meter as per Ex.C-5, on 09.11.2017 the meter was not changed. As per the Electricity Manual, the prescribed period in Standards of Performance on receipt of the complaint in case of burnt meters, then it should be replaced within five working days. As per clause 21.4.1 of Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission, in case a consumer’s meter becomes defective/dead stop or gets burnt a new tested meter shall be installed within the time period prescribed in Standards of Performance on receipt of complainant. As per clause 21.5.2 of Chapter I Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Regulations 2014 in short Supply Code 2014, which is as under:-

         Defective (other than inaccurate)/Dead Stop/Burnt/Stolen Meters.

“The accounts of a consumer shall be overhauled/billed for the period meter remained defective/dead stop and in case of burnt/stolen meter for the period of direct supply subject to maximum period of six months as per procedure given below:

On the basis of energy consumption of corresponding period of previous year.”

                   Thus, the regulations of Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission clearly indicate that the arrears of six months can be recovered from the consumer, if the meter is overhauled for any reason i.e. dead or stop/burnt. There is another clause 21.5.1, wherein it has been specifically mentioned that “If a consumer meter on testing is found to be beyond the limits of accuracy as prescribed hereunder, the account of the consumer shall be overhauled and the electricity charges for all categories of consumers shall be computed in accordance with the said test results for a period not exceeding six months immediately preceding the.”

                   Further, we like to refer another Clause of the Supply Code 2014 i.e. Clause 30.1.2, which is as under:-

                   “The bill cum notice for arrears in the case of under      assessment or the charges levied as a result of checking etc. shall         be initially tendered separately and shall not be clubbed with the   current electricity bill. The arrear bill cum notice would briefly          indicate the nature and period of the terms alongwith calculation         details of such arrears. If the arrears are not cleared by the consumer such arrears shall be indicated regularly in the           subsequent electricity bills. However, in case arrear bill is        included in the current energy bill at the first instance, the     distribution licensee shall not be entitled to make any punitive       action against the consumer for non-payment of such arrear   amount alongwith current energy bill.”

9.                So from the above said documents and after considering the provisions of the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission amended upto 30.06.2018, it becomes clear that the OP cannot charge the amount beyond the period of six months. As discussed above, there is variation in the computer generated bills relied upon by the complainant as well as by the OPs. Even the detail given by the OP, nowhere clarifies how the arrears have been calculated. The bill has been issued on the basis of ‘R’ code when there was the negligence on the part of PSPCL. The meter was not replaced and the provisions of the regulations 21.4.1 have been violated. There is no fault of the consumer rather the fault lies with the OPs as they have not complied with the regulations. Even otherwise the OPs have not given the detail how the arrears in the bills have been calculated and have been included in the current energy bill. Thus, the impugned bill Ex.C-4 is illegal, null and void against the Supply Code and therefore, negligence as well as deficiency in service on the part of the OPs is established.

10.              In view of the above detailed discussion, it is held that the complainant has not made the payment of the electricity bill of Ex.C-1 which was issued on the basis of “O’ Code and the OPs are directed to prepare and issue the bill of the disputed period during which the meter remains burnt from 22 August, 2017 till 21 October, 2018 as per the regulations 21.4.1 and 21.5.2 of the Electricity Supply Instruction Manual. The amount of Rs.5370/- of the bill Ex.C-1, which was issued on the basis of ‘O’ code, shall be deducted from the amount already deposited by the complainant as per the orders of the Commission i.e. of Rs.13,760/- and the balance amount shall be adjusted in the final bill to be prepared and issued by the OPs as per the regulations 21.4.1 and 21.5.2 & etc. of the Electricity Supply Instruction Manual and accordingly, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed and OPs are directed to pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses. The entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

11.              Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated          Jaswant Singh Dhillon    Jyotsna               Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj     

28.06.2022         Member                          Member      President