ORAL

Executive Engineer, Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Vs Rishabh Kumar

07-07-2023

                   BY MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR, PRESIDENT

                                                 ORDER

Heard Sri Isar Husain, learned Counsel for the appellant.

The instant appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 14-12-2022 passed by District Consumer Commission, Kaushambi in Complaint Case No. 64 of 2022 belated along with the delay condonation application.

In the delay condonation application, there are no specific reasons explained for the delay in filing the instant appeal, rather para-4 & 5, the following contents are mentioned :-

“4. That after through discussion with the higher authority, the Division lead to a conclusion to avoid heavy loss to file the appeal in the present case, the papers arranged and handed over to the counsel at Lucknow in the month of June, 2023.

5. That the deponent get prepared the appeal and the same is being filed without any intentional or deliberate delay, the appeal deserves hearing on merits of the case and be decided after affording an opportunity of hearing to both the parties, it is not the case of the respondent that the respondent did not consume electricity, it is the case of the respondent that the late father expired, the respondent opted for OTS even though payment not made. The dues always subsist

-2-

on premises, not on the person under Section 2 (15) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the respondent was not entitled for any relief being defaulter of electricity dues and thus matter deserves for consideration and appeal deserves hearing on merits.”

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order passed by the learned District Consumer Commission is bad and against the correct facts.

I have gone through the delay condonation application filed in support of appeal, apparently the contents mentioned in the delay condonation application are not properly explaining. The delay in filing the instant appeal, however, without considering the same, even if the judgment of the learned District Consumer Commission is read, it can be well said that the learned District Consumer Commission has considered all the relevant facts while deciding the complaint particularly that the complainant has applied for OTS scheme and had paid the entire dues on 23-01-2019 to the tune of Rs. 6781.50. The relevant document/receipt was perused by the learned District Consumer Commission and further that the learned District Consumer Commission has clearly observed that the Lineman of the area has issued the notice for Rs. 18,769/- dated 22-07-2021 and immediately thereafter he has disconnected the electricity of the complainant and thereafter on 13-08-2021 the Lineman Manoj Kumar Mishra has issued another bill/dues bill of Rs. 1,92,742/- along with the notice of demand. The said bill was issued in the name of the father of the complainant. The Lineman and other officials of the appellant Power Corporation threatened the complainant for ‘KURKI’ of the house.

Learned District Consumer Commission after perusal of the entire material adduced by the respective parties has noticed that the connection of the complainant was of 02 KVA and the

-3-

complainant has deposited the amount against the electricity dues and further arrived at a conclusion that the appellant electricity department has illegally disconnected the electricity supply of the complainant while issuing the bill with regard to the alleged dues of Rs. 18,769/- dated 22-07-2021 and further that in the very next month another bill of Rs. 1,92,742/- has been issued along with which the electricity disconnection receipt was also delivered to the complainant. The learned District Consumer Commission therefore came to the conclusion that the entire act of the appellant Power Corporation and the employees of the Power Corporation was bad and against the material available on record, hence the impugned order has been passed.

For kind consideration learned Counsel for the appellant placed the order passed by the learned District Consumer Commission, which read as follows :-

‘परिवादी का परिवाद आंशिक रूप से आज्ञाप्‍त किया जाता है। विपक्षी को आदेशित किया जाता है कि दिनांक 22.07.2021 को विद्युत विच्‍छेदन परिवादी के परिसर की लाइन काटे जाने के पश्‍चात् गलत ढंग से जारी विद्युत बिल न वसूली जाय। परिवादी द्वारा मु. 18,769/- रूपये (अट्ठारह हजार सात सौ उनहत्‍तर) बकाया विद्युत बिल जमा करने के बाद उसका विद्युत कनेक्‍शन अविलम्‍ब जोड़ दिया जाय। विपक्षी की तरफ से विद्युत विच्‍छेदन दिनांक 22.07.2021 के पश्‍चात् जारी समस्‍त विद्युत बिल निरस्‍त किया जाता है। उभयपक्ष अपना-अपना वाद व्‍यय स्‍वयं वहन करेंगे। ’

-4-

I have gone through the judgment and I have considered the submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant. I find no irregularity or illegality in the impugned order of the learned District Consumer Commission, therefore the appeal filed by the learned Counsel for the appellant is dismissed.

No order for cost.

Let copy of this order be made available to the parties as per rules.

The Stenographer is requested to upload this order on the website of this Commission at the earliest.

                                         (JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR)                                                                              PRESIDENT        

            Ashish

           Court No.1