Govinda Mahanta filed a consumer case on 25 Oct 2016 against S.D.O (Elect), Unit- 2, Keonjhar Electrical Division in the Kendujhar Consumer Court. The case no is CC/4/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 02 Nov 2016.
IN THE COURT OF THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KENDUJHAR
CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 04 OF 2016
Govinda Mahanta,
S/o- Shibanath Mahanta,
At- Kandsar, Post- Basantpur,
Dist- Keonjhar, Pin- 758014…………………………………Complainant
Vrs.
S.D.O (Elect.), Unit- 2,
Keonjhar Electrical Division,
At/P.O/Dist- Keonjhar, Pin- 758001…………………….Op. Party
PRESENT: SHRI A.K. PUROHIT, PRESIDENT
SRI S.C. SAHOO, MEMBER
Adv. for the Complainant - Self
Adv. for the OP - SK. Kamal Jumlat (Authorized Person)
_____________________________________________________________
Date of Hearing - 21.09.2016 Date of Order- 25.10.2016
Sri S.C. Sahoo, Member: The brief facts of the case are that the complainant was a BPL beneficiary consumer of the OP bearing consumer No.621211030677 from the year 2010 and the meter was got defect and the OP had arbitrarily charged an average 144 units per month starting from December 2014 to December 2015 though the defect of the meter was communicated to the OP several times but no new meter was installed and the energy charged excess to a BPL beneficiary by the OP. And to this the OP after deliberate persuasion by the complainant a new meter as mentioned was placed in place of old meter vide No.5734074, make-capital with capacity of 5.20 Amp. and CD 0.05KW under RGGVY Scheme to which a condition stipulated to the beneficiary/ complainant will consume only two CFL bulbs through the old meter and from the date of energisation of electricity the complainant had been paying energy charges for 24 units and sometimes 32 units per month. But all on sudden the energy bill enhanced to @144 units per month which was arbitrary and illegally levied by the OP to be revised as per consumption is the dispute and hence this case,
After service of notice to OP appeared through his authorized person and filed his written version by stating that the complaint of the complainant is not at all true and correct and denied by the OP and also the complaint is not maintainable in the eyes of law and fact. The OP has further stated that the power supply was provided to the complainant under RGGVY Scheme as a BPL beneficiary through an energy meter bearing Sl. No.5734074, make- capital, with 0.05KW load factor and with a condition of 2 nos. of CFL bulbs will be used by the complainant through the installed meter and accordingly 24 units per month will be the consumption by the complainant. But the complainant was using 32 units during May 2012 & 45 units during September 2012 which reveals that the complainant was consuming extra loads excluding 2 nos. CFL bulbs by deviating rules meant for the BPL beneficiary under RGGVY Scheme and to this the said meter showed technical error and got defect and accordingly tariff changed from Kutir Jyoti to Domestic with 1KW load factor and the billing was made @144 units per month domestic average during the defect of the meter and the complainant is liable for the cost of the new meter. It is not true that the allegation for not installation of new meter as because the OP had gone to the premises of the complainant two times but the premises was locked and finally the new meter Sl. No.MCG17751, make Genus was installed in the premises of the complainant on 10.02.2016 as per Annexure-1 and the complainant never agitated any complain with this OP about serving of the electric bill to the complainant from month to month and there is an arrear of Rs.7539.79p as on December 2015 as per Annexure-2 and hence prayed to dismiss the case.
Heard, the complainant and the complainant has filed a written argument in his support in absence of the OP and his engaged authorized person and perused the materials available in record. It is not disputed by the OP that the complainant is the consumer. The only dispute was raised by the complainant is that in spite of repeated persuasion for removal of defective meter and installation of new meter and the OP had enhanced @144 units per month from December 2014 to December 2015 which is illegal and arbitrary needs to be revised in the current bill.
From the ledger report it is seen that the OP had levied @144 units per month from December 2014 to December 2015 instead of 24 units as per scheme under RGGVY Scheme of “Kutir Jyoti”.
With these materials available in record and taking into consideration of written version and ledger & installation report i.e. Annexure 1&2 it is proved that the OP was no way of deficiency of service as the complainant failed to provide the evidence regarding intimation of defect meter to OP and as the meter installed on 10.2.2016 and charging of 144 units per month from December 2014 to December 2015 need to be revised as per actual consumption and as per new meter. Hence,
O R D E R
The OP is directed to provide electric bill in regular basis to the complainant for payment of electricity dues onwards as per actual consumption under the RGGVY Scheme by deducting a sum of Rs.5635/- out of Rs.7539.79p as reflects in the ledger Anexure-2 filed by the OP with their written version and the Complainant is directed to pay the balance arrear electricity dues of Rs.1904.79p towards arrear of electricity dues (as per Anexure-2 of OP) within 30 days of receipt of this order. (No cost as to harassment & litigation).
Accordingly, the case of the complainant is disposed of.
I agree
(Sri S.C. Sahoo) (Sri A.K. Purohit)
Member President
DCDRF, KEONJHAR DCDRF, KEONJHAR
Dictated & Corrected by me
(Sri S.C. Sahoo)
MEMBER, DCDRF KEONJHAR
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.